On the Microfoundations of Marxist Macroeconomics

I. The Question of Consistency between Microeconomic Efficiency and Macroeconomic Efficiency

一、经济的微观效率与宏观效率的一致性问题

The question of consistency between microeconomic efficiency and macroeconomic efficiency is an important basic question for both Western economics and Marxist political economy. Western economics is unable to base its analysis of high macroeconomic efficiency on an analysis of high microeconomic efficiency, thereby reaching the conclusion that macroeconomic efficiency and microeconomic efficiency are inconsistent; some even go so far as to directly assert that the level of macroeconomic efficiency has nothing to do with the level of microeconomic efficiency, thus building the analysis of macroeconomic efficiency on a "castle in the air." The inconsistency between microeconomic efficiency and macroeconomic efficiency in Western economics is precisely endogenous to the capitalist market economy based on private ownership. Marxist political economy fully reveals the root of this inconsistency and truly bases the analysis of Marxist macroeconomics on the analysis of Marxist microeconomics.

微观经济效率与宏观经济效率的一致性问题，不管是对西方经济学还是马克思主义政治经济学来说，都是一个重要的基本问题。西方经济学无法把宏观经济效率高的分析建立在微观经济效率高的分析基础之上，从而得出宏观经济效率与微观经济效率不一致的结论，当然更有甚者就直接认为宏观经济效率高低与微观经济效率高低无关，从而把宏观经济效率分析建立在“空中楼阁”之上。西方经济学的微观经济效率与宏观经济效率不一致问题，正是由以私有制为基础的资本主义市场经济所内生的。马克思主义政治经济学充分揭示了这种不一致的根源，真正把马克思主义宏观经济学分析建立在马克思主义微观经济学分析的基础之上。

(1) The Antinomy between the Microeconomic Efficiency of Private Ownership Enterprises and Macroeconomic Efficiency

（一）私有制企业的微观经济效率与宏观经济效率的背反

If we analyze from the perspective of enterprise microeconomic efficiency, private ownership enterprises aim to maximize capital profit, and their level of microeconomic efficiency is measured by the rate of capital profit, manifesting as maximizing output for the same capital input, or minimizing capital input for the same output. Therefore, raising the microeconomic efficiency of private ownership enterprises appears as raising the input-output efficiency of capital. But how is the input-output efficiency of capital raised? The basic methods include: first, making workers create more value increment while simultaneously pressing down the necessary value distributed to workers as much as possible, that is, compressing workers' income as far as possible to their subsistence wage level; second, through the "externalization" of enterprise internal costs, transferring enterprise production costs to workers, nature and society, thereby achieving a reduction in enterprise costs; third, enterprises, by adopting advanced equipment, advanced technology, advanced organization and advanced management and other means, make their own labor productivity exceed the social average labor productivity, thereby extracting surplus value from other similar enterprises in society. But what happens if we try to analyze the efficiency of a macroeconomy based on or founded upon private ownership enterprises from a dynamic, long-term macroeconomic perspective?

如果从企业微观经济效率的角度分析，私有制企业是以追求资本利润最大化为目的，其微观经济效率的高低以资本利润率的高低来衡量，表现为相同的资本投入产出最大化，或者相同产出资本投入的最小化。因此，提高私有制企业的微观经济效率就表现为提高资本的投入产出效率。可是，如何提高资本的投入产出效率呢？其基本方式包括：第一，让劳动者创造更多的价值增量，同时尽可能压低分配给劳动者的必要价值，即尽可能把劳动者收入压缩到其生存工资水平；第二，通过企业内部成本“外部化”，把企业生产成本转移给劳动者、自然和社会，从而实现企业成本的减量；第三，企业通过采用先进设备、先进技术、先进组织和先进管理等手段，从而使得自身的劳动生产率超过社会平均劳动生产率，进而从社会上其他同类企业获取超额剩余价值。但是，如果我们尝试从动态的、长期的宏观经济视角来分析以私有制企业为主体或基础的宏观经济的效率会如何？

From the perspective of Marxist economics, the microefficiency of an enterprise ultimately depends on the quality of human beings, that is, the level of labor capacity. The various new equipment, new technologies, new organizational forms, new management concepts, etc., that can raise labor productivity all come from the creative inventions of workers and depend on workers' labor to be implemented. However, private ownership enterprises, by extending working hours, increasing labor intensity and pressing down workers' income levels, damage workers' physical health and their comprehensive development and the improvement of their own quality; at the same time, they also damage the high-quality cultivation of the next generation of workers who depend on workers' income for their livelihood. Therefore, from a dynamic and long-term perspective, they also reduce the generation of new equipment, new technologies, new organizational forms and new management concepts, thereby hindering the long-term improvement of the overall social labor productivity. Increasing workers' labor time and labor intensity to make workers create more surplus value, thereby increasing the profit belonging to capital owners and transformed from surplus value, yet leads to an increase in the phenomenon of workers' "death from overwork." This is not only a "disaster" for the workers themselves and their families, but also causes an accelerated depletion of the entire society's labor resources. Therefore, under the condition that other variables remain unchanged, if we examine the relationship between the microeconomic efficiency of private ownership enterprises and workers' income from a dynamic, long-term, macro perspective, the more value workers create and the lower their income, the higher the enterprise microefficiency measured by the rate of capital profit or the capital input-output ratio, but this ultimately leads to a reduction in the macroeconomic efficiency of the entire society.

从马克思主义经济学的视角分析，企业的微观效率最终都是取决于人的素质即劳动能力的高低。各种可以提高劳动生产率的新设备、新技术、新组织形式、新经营理念等都来自于劳动者的创造发明并依赖劳动者的劳动才能够实施。而私有制企业通过延长劳动时间、提高劳动强度并压低劳动者收入水平，损害了劳动者身体及劳动者全面发展和自身素质的提高，同时还损害了依赖劳动者收入养活的下一代劳动者的高素质培养，因此，从动态和长期来看也减少了新设备、新技术、新组织形式、新经营理念的产生，从而不利于全社会整体劳动生产率的长期提高。因增加劳动者的劳动时间和劳动强度来让劳动者创造更多的剩余价值，从而增加归资本所有者所有的由剩余价值转化而来的利润，却导致劳动者的“过劳死”现象的增多，这不仅仅对劳动者自身和劳动者家庭是一个“灾难”，而且造成整个社会劳动力资源的加速减损。因此，在保持其他变量不变的条件下，如果从动态的、长期的、宏观的视角来考察私有制企业的微观经济效率与劳动者收入之间的关系，劳动者创造的价值越多而收入越低，以资本利润率或资本投入产出率所衡量的企业微观效率就越高，但最终却会导致整个社会的宏观经济效率的降低。

Private ownership enterprises raise their microeconomic efficiency through the "externalization" of internal costs. For example, to reduce costs, enterprises do not treat the pollution generated by production. Although this raises the enterprise's microeconomic efficiency measured by the capital input-output ratio, it damages the natural environment on which human survival depends, thereby lowering the quality of the entire society's economic development. In the end, society has no choice but to treat the pollution through public investment, and this portion of public investment could otherwise have been used to invest in education, provide more green spaces and other public goods to improve human development and quality of life. Another example: to raise microeconomic efficiency measured by the capital input-output ratio, enterprises reduce investment in labor protection materials, damaging workers' physical and mental health, such as the emergence of "pneumoconiosis." The result is not only that workers' own quality of life declines or even their labor capacity is lost, but they also have to go to hospital for treatment, thereby increasing the entire society's investment in public medical resources. Therefore, private ownership enterprises raise the rate of capital profit through the "externalization" of internal costs. The result is an increase in enterprise microefficiency measured by the rate of capital profit or the capital input-output ratio, but from a dynamic, long-term macroeconomic perspective, it leads to a reduction in the entire society's macroeconomic efficiency.

私有制企业通过内部成本“外部化”来提高企业的微观经济效率，例如，为降低成本，企业对生产所产生污染的不治理，虽然提高了企业以资本投入产出率所衡量的微观经济效率，但是却损害了人类赖以生存的自然环境，从而降低了整个社会经济发展的质量，最后还是不得不通过社会的公共投入来治理污染，而这部分公共投入本来可以用来投资教育、提供更多绿地等公共品来改进人类的发展和生存质量。还比如，企业为提高资本投入产出率衡量的微观经济效率，减少对劳保资料的投入，损害了劳动者的身心健康，如“尘肺病”的出现，其结果是劳动者不仅仅自身的生活质量下降甚至劳动能力丧失，还不得不到医院治疗，从而又增加了整个社会公共医疗资源的投入。因此，私有制企业通过内部成本的“外部化”提高资本的利润率，其结果是以资本利润率或资本投入产出率衡量的企业微观经济效率的提高，但从动态的、长期的宏观经济视角来看却导致了整个社会宏观经济效率的降低。

The above discusses the antinomy between the microeconomic efficiency of a single private ownership enterprise and the macroeconomic efficiency of society. What happens if we examine the many private ownership enterprises competing with each other in the market?

以上是讨论单个私有制企业的微观经济效率与社会的宏观经济效率的背反关系。如果我们考察市场中众多相互竞争的私有制企业会怎样呢？

First, those enterprises with a high rate of exploitation, a high degree of "externalization" of internal costs, and thus a high rate of capital profit, as well as those enterprises that first adopt advanced equipment, advanced technology, advanced organization and advanced management means to obtain surplus value, will rapidly accumulate capital relative to similar enterprises, leading to a differentiation in enterprise capital scale and a differentiation in the capital wealth owned by enterprise capitalists.

首先，那些因剥削率高、企业内部成本“外部化”多使得资本利润率高的企业，以及那些因最先采用先进设备、先进技术、先进组织和先进管理手段从而获取超额剩余价值的企业，相对于同类企业就会迅速进行资本积累，导致企业资本规模的分化和企业资本所有者占有资本财富的分化。

Second, in market competition, those enterprises with more substantial capital have stronger risk-resistance capabilities and can at the same time adopt various means including low-price strategies to attack competitors, expand production scale and market share, and gain a monopoly market advantage. Obtaining more capital income and market advantage by virtue of large capital scale, and thereby obtaining large monopoly income, will in turn accelerate capital accumulation, making capital further concentrate and centralize. This is what we often call the "Matthew effect" of market competition: the strong become stronger, the weak become weaker.

其次，在市场竞争中，那些具有更雄厚资本的企业抗风险能力更强，同时能够采取包括低价策略在内的多种手段打击竞争对手来扩大生产规模和市场占有率，获取市场垄断优势地位。凭借资本规模大而获得更多资本收入和市场优势进而获得大量垄断收入，就会又加速资本积累，使得资本进一步积聚和集中。这就是我们经常所说的市场竞争的“马太效应”，强者更强，弱者更弱。

Third, the differentiation in capital ownership further intensifies the differentiation between "distribution according to capital" and "distribution according to labor" in the entire society. On one side of society is the accumulation of enormous wealth; on the other side is the accumulation of workers' absolute poverty or relative poverty. Even the petty-bourgeois economist Thomas Piketty points out: "The process of private capital accumulation and distribution itself has a powerful driving force that makes wealth concentrated and often excessively concentrated. ... In the long run, the rate of return on capital (especially the rate of return on top capital) significantly exceeds the economic growth rate. The difference between the two causes the initial gap between capitals to persist (capital holders only need to reinvest a small portion of their capital income to maintain their living standards, while reinvesting most of it) and may lead to a high concentration of capital." Looking at the situation in the United States, which is based on a private ownership economy, from 2002 to 2007, "the top 1% captured more than 65% of the total national income. While the top 1% saw astonishing income gains, the situation for most Americans actually worsened." Even examining household income, the polarization of income distribution in the United States is quite severe: "By 2007, the year before the financial crisis broke out, the income of the top 0.1% of American households was 220 times the average income of the bottom 90% of households. Wealth distribution is even more unequal than income distribution; the richest 1% of the population owned more than one-third of the nation's wealth."

再次，资本占有的分化进一步加剧全社会“按资分配”与“按劳分配”的分化，社会一方面是巨额财富的积累，另一方面是劳动者绝对贫困或者相对贫困的积累。甚至连小资产阶级经济学家托马斯·皮凯蒂也指出，“私人资本的积累和分配过程本身就具有使财富集中且往往过度集中的强大推动力。······从长期来看，资本收益率（特别是顶级资本的收益率）明显超过经济增长率。两者之差导致初始资本之间的差距一直延续下去（资本持有者只需将资本收入的一小部分用于保持自己的生活水平，而将大部分用于再投资），并且可能造成资本的高度集中。”从以私有制为经济基础的美国的情况来看，2002－2007年，“上层的1%群体攫取了比国民总收入65%还要多的财富。当上层的1%群体收入惊人时，大多数美国人的境遇实际上变得更差了。”即使以家庭收入来考察，美国收入分配的两极分化也相当严重，“截至2007年，也就是金融危机爆发的前一年，美国社会最上层的0.1%的家庭所拥有的收入是社会底层90%家庭平均收入的220倍。财富分配甚至比收入分配更不平等，最富有的1%人群拥有的财富超过国家财富的1/3。”

Finally, when social products are produced at a greater rate and on a larger scale, they encounter the limitation of insufficient consumption by the broad masses of laborers due to their lack of purchasing power. That is to say, the products (including services) produced cannot all be sold. Thus the entire social economic cycle of “capital investment—production—consumption—greater capital recovery” encounters an obstacle at the “consumption” link. As David Harvey points out, “Long-term inequality in distribution leads to an imbalance between production and realization. Insufficient effective demand among the masses delays or obstructs the circulation of capital.” If a single enterprise encounters such an obstacle, it is of little consequence; that enterprise will end in bankruptcy or closure. However, if most enterprises in the whole society encounter such an obstacle, an economic crisis emerges, and the macroeconomic operation and development of the entire society must be interrupted or slowed down. Capitalist society, based on the economic foundation of private enterprises, has never escaped the “curse” of “economic crisis”; every so often, “economic crisis” recurs. This is because it is endogenously determined by the laws of competition among private enterprises and private capital in a private-ownership market economy, along with the law of polarization in income distribution that this competition generates. As Stiglitz points out, “The degree of inequality in America today, and the way it is generated, actually weakens both growth and efficiency. … When inequality increases, economic growth slows—the piece of the pie that most Americans get also shrinks.” “High inequality leads to an economy that is less efficient and less productive.”

最后，当社会产品以更大速率和更大规模生产出来的时候，却遇到了广大劳动者因没有支付能力导致的消费不足的限制，就是说生产出来的产品（包括服务）不能全部卖出去，这样整个社会的“资本投资—生产—消费—更大资本回收”的经济循环在“消费”这个环节遇到了障碍。正如大卫·哈维指出，“长期的分配不平等导致生产与实现之间的失衡。大众的有效需求不足，会拖延或阻碍资本的流通。”如果是单个企业遇到这样的障碍还无关紧要，该企业会以破产倒闭结束。但是，如果全社会大部分企业都遇到这样的障碍，经济危机就出现了，整个社会的宏观经济运行和发展不得不中断或者放缓。以私有制企业为经济基础的资本主义社会始终没有摆脱“经济危机”的“魔咒”，每隔一段时间“经济危机”就会重复出现。因为这是由私有制市场经济中的私有制企业和私有资本竞争规律及其带来的收入分配两极分化规律所内生决定的。正如斯蒂格里茨指出，“今日美国的不平等的程度以及它的产生方式实际上既削弱了增长也破坏了效率。……当不平等加剧时，经济增长放缓了——大多数美国人所得到的那块饼也缩小了。”“高度的不平等导致一种效率和生产率都较低的经济”。

Therefore, examining the laws of competition among private enterprises in the entire market economy from a dynamic, long-term macroeconomic perspective also reveals that the high microeconomic efficiency of individual private enterprises can lead to low efficiency in the macroeconomic development of the whole society.

因此，从动态的、长期的宏观经济视角来考察整个市场经济中私有制企业之间的竞争规律，也会发现个体私有制企业的微观经济效率高会导致整个社会宏观经济发展的效率低。

(2) The Unity of Microeconomic Efficiency and Macroeconomic Efficiency in Publicly Owned Enterprises

（二）公有制企业的微观经济效率与宏观经济效率的统一

Unlike private enterprises, which are owned by a few private individuals, publicly owned enterprises are owned by the whole people or all laborers. Thus publicly owned enterprises exclude the different incomes obtained through “distribution according to capital” based on the size of capital, and implement only “distribution according to labor” based on the amount of labor contributed. This eliminates the polarization of social income generated by the divergence between capital income and labor income in private enterprises, and prevents the accumulation of absolute and relative poverty alongside the accumulation of wealth in the social economy. Since the capital of publicly owned enterprises is owned by the whole people or all laborers, enterprises will not harm the survival and development needs of laborers themselves in pursuit of capital appreciation, nor will they destroy the laborers themselves and the natural environment on which they depend by “externalizing” internal costs. Moreover, from a dynamic, long-term macroeconomic perspective, publicly owned enterprises implementing distribution according to labor not only achieve high microeconomic efficiency for the enterprise but also avoid the polarization of overall social income distribution, effectively solving the problem of insufficient effective demand with purchasing power in the market economy, and ensuring the virtuous cycle of the entire economic operation of “capital investment—production—consumption—capital reinvestment,” thereby achieving sustainable and rapid macroeconomic development. To demonstrate this argument, we use a proof by contradiction below.

与私有制企业为少数私人所有不同，公有制企业为全民或全体劳动者所有，这样公有制企业就排斥了凭借资本大小而取得“按资分配”的不同收入，仅仅实行凭借劳动投入多少而取得“按劳分配”的不同收入。这样就杜绝了因私有制企业中资本收入与劳动收入的分化而产生的社会收入两极分化，防止社会经济中一方面是财富的大量积累，另一方面是绝对贫困和相对贫困的积累。公有制企业资本为全民或全体劳动者所有，企业不会为追求资本增殖而损害劳动者自身生存和发展的需求，企业也不会通过内部成本“外部化”来破坏劳动者自身及其赖以生存的自然环境。而且从动态的、长期的宏观经济视角来看，公有制企业实行按劳分配，既实现了企业的微观经济效率高，又避免了社会整体收入分配的两极分化，有效解决了市场经济中有支付能力的有效需求不足问题，保证“资本投入—生产—消费—资本再投入”的整个经济运行的良性循环，从而达到社会宏观经济可持续地快速发展。为论证此观点，我们下面采用反证法。

Suppose a market economy implements private ownership of the means of production and distribution according to capital. In that case, even if enterprises or individuals start with the same initial wealth, the mechanism of survival of the fittest in market competition and the Matthew effect will inevitably lead to polarization in the ownership of the means of production. This polarization of wealth further intensifies the divergence between distribution according to capital and distribution according to labor—that is, capital obtains more income relative to labor—and the polarization of wealth and income will increasingly intensify. This polarization of income distribution then leads to polarization in consumption, because the consumption of wealthy capital owners is always limited by their physiology and numbers, while the consumption of the majority of ordinary laborers is limited by their limited purchasing power. Thus society as a whole exhibits insufficient effective demand. This is precisely what Marxist economics points out: the contradiction between the unlimited expansion of product supply in a capitalist private-ownership market economy and the relatively narrow effective demand of the people. This contradiction cannot be fundamentally resolved under the conditions of a capitalist private-ownership market economy; it can only be forcibly alleviated through recurring economic crises. After the Great Depression of the 1920s and 1930s, the bourgeois economist Keynes also saw the problem of insufficient effective demand in the capitalist market economy based on private ownership, but he attributed it to three psychological causes—the diminishing marginal propensity to consume, the diminishing marginal efficiency of capital, and liquidity preference—which led to insufficient consumption and investment. Keynesianism thus advocated large-scale state intervention in the economy. The implementation of Keynesian policies temporarily saved the capitalist market economy system based on capitalist private ownership and distribution according to capital, which was on the verge of collapse during the Great Depression of the 1920s and 1930s, but it did not solve the fundamental problem of insufficient effective demand in capitalism. This led to the severe “stagflation” of the 1970s—the coexistence of “oversupply” and “inflation” in Western capitalist economies—as a consequence of government intervention. Keynesianism was powerless against this, and correspondingly, neoliberalism, which advocated reducing government intervention and returning to the free market, began to rise. However, neither the Keynesian nor the neoliberal toolbox solved the problem of the private-ownership economic foundation of the capitalist market economy. Therefore, the contradiction between production and consumption in the capitalist market economy cannot be fundamentally resolved, and the capitalist macroeconomy has always faced the problem of low efficiency and unsustainable development. Entering the 21st century, capitalist economic crises still occur periodically. The subprime mortgage financial crisis in the United States, the most developed capitalist country, in 2008 was essentially a financial and economic crisis triggered by loan defaults from laborers who had actual housing demand but lacked strong purchasing power—that is, subprime borrowers. Of course, under the pressure of class struggle, contemporary Western capitalist countries have vigorously developed social welfare, adopting measures such as progressive income taxes, improved social security, and expanded consumer credit to mitigate or delay the polarization of wealth and the insufficiency of effective demand, allowing the economy to continue developing. However, the capitalist macroeconomy has long fallen into a predicament of slow growth and prolonged stagnation.

假设市场经济中实行生产资料私有制和按资分配。这样，即便是企业或个人初始的财富一样，但是市场竞争中的优胜劣汰机制和马太效应的作用，必然导致生产资料归属的两极分化，这种贫富分化进一步加剧按资分配与按劳分配的分野，即资本相对劳动取得更多收入，财富和收入的两极分化会日益加剧。这种收入分配的两极分化进而导致了消费的两极分化，因为富有的资本所有者的消费受制于其生理和人数的限制导致其消费总是有限度的，而大多数普通劳动者的消费受制于其有限的支付能力，这样社会在整体上就表现为有效需求不足。这正是马克思主义经济学所指出的，资本主义私有制市场经济产品供给的无限扩张与人们有效需求相对狭小之间的矛盾，这种矛盾在资本主义私有制市场经济条件下无法根本解决，只能以重复出现的经济危机强行缓解。在20世纪二三十年代资本主义经济大危机之后，资产阶级经济学家凯恩斯虽然同样看到以私有制为基础的资本主义市场经济的有效需求不足问题，但是他却把有效需求不足归结为三个心理原因即人们的边际消费倾向递减、资本边际效率递减和流动性偏好造成的消费不足和投资不足，由此凯恩斯主义主张实行大规模的国家干预经济的政策。凯恩斯主义政策的推行暂时挽救了在20世纪二三十年代资本主义经济大危机中濒危的以资本主义私有制和按资分配为基础的资本主义市场经济制度，却没有解决资本主义有效需求不足的根本问题所在，导致20世纪70年代政府干预的后遗症即西方资本主义经济的“供过于求”与“通货膨胀”并存的严重“滞胀”现象。凯恩斯主义对此却无能为力了，相应地主张减少政府干预、回到自由市场的新自由主义开始兴起。但是，不管是凯恩斯主义，还是新自由主义的工具箱都没有解决资本主义市场经济的私有制经济基础问题，因此，资本主义市场经济的生产与消费的矛盾就不可能得到根本化解，资本主义宏观经济始终面临低效率和不可持续发展的问题。资本主义市场经济进入到21世纪，但是资本主义经济危机依然在周期性发生。最发达的资本主义国家美国2008年发生次级债金融危机实质也是由于有实际住房需求但是却没有很强支付能力即次级贷款的劳动者贷款违约而引发的金融危机和经济危机。当然，当今西方资本主义国家在阶级博弈压力下大力发展社会福利，通过征收累进所得税、健全社会保障、发展消费信贷等措施来缓和或延缓贫富的两极分化和有效需求的不足，经济才得以继续发展，但是资本主义宏观经济却长期陷入了低速发展和长期萧条的困局。

Therefore, only a market economy based on publicly owned enterprises, implementing public ownership of the means of production and capital along with distribution according to labor, can effectively solve the problem of insufficient effective demand. In other words, the higher the degree of distribution according to labor implemented by enterprises, the better the coordination between production and consumption, and the more sustainable, healthy, and rapid the development of the social macroeconomy. Of course, distribution according to labor also involves differences in income distribution. Marx points out, “One person is superior to another physically or mentally, and so supplies more labor in the same time, or can labor for a longer time; … one worker is married, another not; one has more children than another, and so on. Thus, with the same labor contribution and therefore the same share from the social consumption fund, one person in fact receives more than another, and thus becomes richer than another, and so on.” [n] However, compared with the income gaps caused by distribution according to capital, the income gaps resulting from income distribution based on the amount of labor are very small. If further adjusted by government fiscal and tax policies, the polarization of income distribution can be eliminated, thereby ensuring sufficient effective demand. Social products will always achieve their “dangerous leap,” [n] and the social macroeconomy can achieve high efficiency and sustainable development.

因此，只有建立在以公有制企业为基础的市场经济，实行生产资料和资本公有制以及按劳分配才能切实解决有效需求不足问题，或者说企业按劳分配实现的程度越高，生产和消费就协调得越好，社会宏观经济就越可持续地、健康地、快速地向前发展。当然，按劳分配也有收入分配的差距问题。马克思指出，“一个人在体力或智力上胜过另一个人，因此在同一劳动时间里提供较多的劳动，或者能够劳动较长时间；……一个劳动者已经结婚，另一个则没有；一个劳动者的子女较多，另一个的子女较少，如此等等。因此在提供的劳动相同、从而由社会消费基金中分得的份额相同的条件下，某一个人事实上所得的比另一个人多些，也就比另一个人富些，如此等等。” 但是，与按资分配所导致的收入差距相比较而言，这种按照劳动多少来进行收入分配所导致的收入差距很小，如果再进行政府的财政和税收调节，就可以杜绝收入分配的两极分化，从而保证有效需求的充足，社会生产的产品也就总能实现“惊险的跳跃”，社会宏观经济就能够实现高效率和可持续发展。

In sum, the higher the degree to which distribution according to work is realized in public-owned enterprises, the higher the labor productivity and microeconomic efficiency of the enterprise, and the better the operation of the social macroeconomy and the higher its efficiency. Therefore, the microeconomic efficiency of public-owned enterprises and macroeconomic efficiency possess an inherent unity.

总之，公有制企业中按劳分配实现程度越高，企业的劳动生产率和微观经济效率就越高，同时社会宏观经济运行得也就越好，社会宏观经济效率也就越高。因此，公有制企业的微观经济效率与宏观经济效率具有内在的统一性。

II. The Microeconomic Foundation of Sustainable Macroeconomic Development

二、宏观经济可持续发展的微观经济基础

(I) Microeconomic Analysis of Sustainable Macroeconomic Development

（一）宏观经济可持续发展的微观经济分析

The question of microeconomic efficiency is a question of input and output, i.e., the larger the ratio of output to input, the higher the efficiency (or the smaller the ratio of input to output, the higher the efficiency). The microeconomic efficiency of an enterprise depends on the quantity and quality of inputs of material factors (capital, land, factory buildings, machinery, technology, raw materials, etc.) and human factors (labor power), as well as the quality of the combination between the two. The most crucial factor is the quality and caliber of the labor force, not only because workers determine how much capital is used, what kind of land, factory buildings, machinery, technology, and raw materials are developed or adopted, but also because workers determine the mode of input and mode of combination of these material factors, as well as the mode of combination among workers themselves (organizational form), the mode of labor, and the labor process. That is to say, material factors cannot function without workers, and the effectiveness (amount of output) of material factors under the management of different workers also differs. Therefore, workers are the active factor; they are not only the creators of their own income, but also the creators of the "surplus value" by which "output" exceeds "input." Once we extend from a single enterprise to multiple enterprises, and view the matter from the perspective of the entire social macroeconomy, the key issue is not merely the creation of enterprise "surplus value," but even more so the distribution of "surplus value." However, the distribution of "surplus value" depends on the form of ownership of the input factors, yet the outcome of the distribution of "surplus value" in turn affects the realization of "surplus value." If the enterprise's output is not exchanged for money, "surplus value" is not realized, the distribution of "surplus value" cannot proceed, the entire macroeconomic operation encounters obstacles, and economic development becomes unsustainable.

微观经济效率问题是一个投入产出问题，即产出与投入的比值越大，效率就越高（或投入与产出的比值越小，效率就越高）。企业的微观经济效率取决于物的要素的投入（资金、土地、厂房、机器、技术、原材料等）和人的要素（劳动力）投入的质量以及二者之间的结合质量。其中最关键的是劳动力的素质和质量，不仅仅是因为劳动者决定使用多少资金、开发或采用什么样的土地、厂房、机器、技术和原材料，而且是劳动者决定了这些物的要素的投入方式和组合方式，以及劳动者与劳动者之间的组合方式（组织形式）、劳动方式和劳动过程。就是说，物的要素离开了劳动者不能发挥作用，而且物的要素在不同的劳动者的管理下发挥的作用效益（产出多少）也不同。因此，劳动者是能动的要素，不仅仅是自己收入的创造者，而且是“产出”超过“投入”的“剩余价值”的创造者。而一旦从一个企业扩展到多个企业，从整个社会宏观经济看，问题的关键就不仅仅是企业“剩余价值”的创造，更在于“剩余价值”的分配。但是，“剩余价值”的分配又取决于投入要素的所有制形式，可是“剩余价值”的分配结果却反过来影响到“剩余价值”的实现。如果说，企业的产出没有交换成货币，“剩余价值”就没有实现，“剩余价值”的分配也无法进行，整个宏观经济运行就遇到障碍，经济发展就不可持续。

Although the level of macroeconomic development efficiency and the level of enterprise microeconomic development efficiency both depend on the quantity and quality of inputs of material and human factors, the key in both cases is the quantity and quality of inputs of human factors. Macroeconomic operation is based on the microeconomic operation of enterprises, but macroeconomic operation is far more complex than the microeconomic operation of an enterprise, because the efficiency and sustainability of macroeconomic operation also depend on the coordination and dynamic adjustment of various economic structures and proportional relations. For example, the balance between supply and demand, the connection between production and consumption, the coordination between the two major departments of means of production production and means of consumption production, the competitive relationship of survival of the fittest among enterprises in the same industry, the matching of capital financing (financial services) with capital demand (the real economy), the interaction between the increase in the supply of private consumer goods (capital accumulation) and the growth of public goods supply (taxation), and so on.

虽然宏观经济的发展效益高低与企业微观经济发展的效益高低都取决于物的要素和人的要素的投入数量和质量，但是关键都是人的要素的投入数量和质量。宏观经济运行以企业微观经济运行为基础，但是，宏观经济运行比企业的微观经济运行要复杂得多，这是因为宏观经济运行效率和可持续性还取决于各种经济结构和比例关系的协调和动态调整。比如，供给与需求的平衡，生产与消费的对接，生产资料生产与消费资料生产两大部类的协调，同行业不同企业的竞争优胜劣汰关系，资金融通（金融服务）与资金需求（实体经济）的匹配，私人消费品供给增加（资本积累）与公共产品供给（税收）增长的互动，等等。

In a market economy based on private ownership, enterprise surplus value, manifested as profit, is used not only for consumption by the owners of the means of production or capital owners, but mainly for accumulation and expanded reproduction. Therefore, production supply is constantly expanding, but the income available for consumption by workers has not increased proportionally. Capital owners, constrained by the fact that they constitute a tiny minority of the total population and by the limits of their own needs, have some expansion of their consumption capacity but its total amount is limited, while the consumption demand with purchasing power of the vast majority of the people in society has not increased proportionally with expanded reproduction. Consequently, from the perspective of the whole society, the supply of social consumer goods far exceeds consumption demand. That is to say, from the perspective of the entire macroeconomy, a market economy based on private ownership always produces sharp contradictions between supply and demand, and between production and consumption. We see that in capitalist society, on the one hand, the needs of the working class and other working people are not met; on the other hand, the production equipment of enterprises is not fully utilized, and capacity utilization rates are low. When an economic crisis occurs in capitalism, large numbers of enterprises close, go bankrupt, or collapse, and macroeconomic development regresses. Moreover, in private-owned enterprises, because workers receive only a subsistence wage, this also affects the development and quality improvement of the workers themselves and their offspring, thereby affecting the supply of high-quality labor power needed for macroeconomic development, and in turn affecting the quality of macroeconomic development. To resolve the contradiction between production expansion and insufficient consumption, Marx proposed implementing public ownership in which workers collectively own the means of production, allowing production to be under the control of workers, achieving a coordinated ratio between accumulation and consumption, and increasing production supply in accordance with the expansion needs of consumption demand.

在私有制为基础的市场经济中，表现为利润的企业剩余价值在被用于生产资料所有者或资本所有者消费外，主要用于积累和扩大再生产，因此生产供给总是在不断地扩大，但是劳动者可用于消费的收入却没有同比例增长。资本所有者受制于其人数在总人口中占极少数和自身需求的限制，虽然其消费能力有所扩张但其总量有限，而社会大多数人民群众有支付能力的消费需求却没有与扩大再生产同比例地增长。因此，从整个社会来看，社会消费品的供给远远超过消费需求。这就是说，从整个宏观经济看，以私有制为基础的市场经济总是会产生供给与需求、生产与消费的尖锐矛盾。我们看到在资本主义社会中，一方面工人阶级等劳动人民的需求没有得到满足，另一方面企业的生产设备没有得到充分利用，开工率不足。在资本主义发生经济危机时，还会出现大批企业关门、破产、倒闭，宏观经济发展出现倒退。另外，私有制企业中由于劳动者仅仅得到生存工资，也影响到了劳动者自身及其后代的发展和素质提高，从而影响到宏观经济发展所需的高素质劳动力的供给，进而影响到宏观经济发展的质量。为了解决生产扩张与消费不足的矛盾，马克思提出，实行让劳动者共同占有生产资料的公有制，让生产在劳动者的控制下，实现积累与消费的比例协调，按照消费需求的扩张需要来增加生产供给。

In a market economy, we see that within individual enterprises, production operations are orderly, organized, and planned, but from the perspective of the entire social macroeconomy, there is a blind anarchy. First, an individual enterprise does not know how much other enterprises in the same industry are producing. In a market economy based on private ownership, how much an enterprise produces, what sales strategies it adopts, etc., are all business secrets. Second, the individual enterprise does not know how much consumers can consume. Although modern enterprises generally conduct market research before production, what consumers are willing to consume is different from what they have the purchasing power to consume, and the enterprise does not know how many substitute products exist for its product. Therefore, enterprises first produce products according to a pre-arranged plan, and then decide to increase or decrease production based on the sales situation of the products. If supply exceeds demand, enterprises will reduce production, enterprise production capacity will become idle, and production resources already allocated to the enterprise will be wasted; if demand exceeds supply, enterprises decide to expand reproduction. If all enterprises independently decide to expand reproduction, this may lead to a sharp increase in production supply, exceeding total demand, which in turn will lead to a contraction of enterprise production in the next cycle. Therefore, from the perspective of overall macroeconomic development, economic development will experience fluctuations. When the entire macroeconomy is booming, most enterprises are optimistic about the prospects and expand reproduction, which may lead to a general and severe oversupply of production, and may even ultimately lead to the bankruptcy and collapse of large numbers of enterprises, resulting in an economic crisis. To maintain the dynamic matching of various economic structures and proportional relations within a reasonable range, relying solely on the market and the self-regulation of micro-enterprises is always lagging and limited; it is necessary to carry out planned regulation and macroeconomic control from the perspective of the social economy as a whole. However, the effectiveness of such planned regulation and macroeconomic control depends in turn on the size of the primary income distribution gap at the enterprise level, which is determined by differences in ownership.

在市场经济中，我们看到个体企业内部生产运转有序、有组织、有计划，但是从整个社会宏观经济来看却是一种盲目的无政府状态。首先，该个体企业并不知道同行业的其他企业生产多少。在以私有制为基础的市场经济中，企业生产多少产品，采取什么样的销售策略等都是企业的机密。其次，该个体企业不知道消费者能够消费多少产品。虽然现代企业在生产前一般会进行市场调研，但是，消费者愿意消费多少与有支付能力消费多少不一样，该企业对其产品的替代产品有多少也不可知。所以，企业都是先根据事先计划生产出产品，根据销售出去的产品情况决定增加生产或者减少生产。如果供过于求，企业会减少生产，企业的生产能力就会出现闲置，已经配置到企业的生产资源就出现浪费现象；如果供不应求，这时企业决定扩大再生产，如果是所有企业都自主地决策扩大再生产，就可能导致生产供给的急剧增长，从而超过总需求，这样又会导致下一轮循环中企业生产的萎缩。因此，从整个宏观经济发展上看，经济发展就会出现波动。在整个宏观经济高涨的时候，大多数企业都对前景保持乐观，都扩大再生产，就可能导致生产供给的普遍严重过剩，甚至最后导致大批企业破产、倒闭，出现经济危机。为了保持各种经济结构和比例在合理范围内动态匹配，依靠市场和微观企业自身的调节总是滞后的、有限度的，就需要社会经济从整体出发进行计划调节和宏观调控，但是这种计划调节和宏观调控的有效性又取决于因所有制不同导致企业层面第一次收入分配差距的大小。

(II) Ownership and the Income Distribution Gap

（二）所有制与收入分配差距

The most important structure for sustainable macroeconomic development is the structure of aggregate supply and aggregate demand, and the structure of aggregate supply and aggregate demand in turn depends on the distribution structure (the structure of accumulation and consumption), because the “accumulation” portion allocated to the owners of capital is mainly used for expanded reproduction, thereby increasing future supply, and whether the increased supply can be sold on the market depends mainly on whether the income allocated to workers and capital owners for “consumption” grows in proportion to the increased supply. In the distribution link, accumulation and consumption are in a trade-off relationship: the more “accumulation” allocated to capital owners for expanded reproduction, the less is allocated to workers for “consumption.” Yet in the link of product realization, accumulation and consumption must match: after expanded reproduction produces more products, a larger income available for “consumption” is needed to purchase and consume them. However, what determines the distribution structure is the ownership structure of the means of production, i.e., to whom the various means of production belong, as well as their composition and interrelations. Marx held that the distribution of products depends on the distribution of the means of production, i.e., to whom each element in the production structure belongs. “The structure of distribution is completely determined by the structure of production. Distribution is itself a product of production, not only in its object, but also in its form. In its object, only the results of production can be distributed; in its form, the specific mode of participation in production determines the specific form of distribution, the form in which one participates in distribution.” [5]5 Karl Marx, *A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy*, Preface. The translation follows the standard English edition.

宏观经济能够可持续发展最重要的结构是总供给与总需求的结构，而总供给与总需求的结构又取决于分配结构（积累与消费的结构），因为分配给资本所有者的“积累”部分主要是被用于扩大再生产，从而增加未来的供给，而增加后的供给能否在市场上销售出去，又主要取决于分配给劳动者和资本所有者用于“消费”的收入是否与增加的供给同比例增长。在分配环节，积累与消费是此消彼长的关系，即分配给资本所有者用于扩大再生产的“积累”多，分配给劳动者用于“消费”的部分就少。而在产品的实现环节却要求积累与消费相匹配，即扩大再生产后生产更多的产品需要更大的可用于“消费”的收入来购买并消费掉。但是，决定分配结构的又是生产要素的所有制结构，即各种生产要素归谁所有以及其构成和相互关系。马克思认为产品的分配取决于各生产要素的分配，即生产结构中各要素归谁所有。“分配的结构完全决定于生产的结构。分配本身是生产的产物，不仅就对象说是如此，而且就形式说也是如此。就对象说，能分配的只是生产的成果，就形式说，参与生产的一定方式决定分配的特殊形式，决定参与分配的形式。”

In the production of a market economy, the means of production belong to different owners, and the owners obtain income by virtue of their ownership of the respective means of production. Although all this income is created by the workers, the workers, as owners of labor power, only obtain income equal to the value of their necessary labor, i.e., wages, while the surplus value created by the workers is “shared” and appropriated by the owners of other factors. The landlord obtains rent by virtue of ownership of land, the house owner obtains rent by virtue of ownership of housing, the bank obtains interest by virtue of ownership of funds, the equipment lessor obtains lease payments by virtue of ownership of equipment, and the entrepreneur obtains profit by virtue of ownership of invested capital. Apart from the owner of labor power, the “income” obtained by the owners of other factors refers to the portion exceeding the original value of the factors invested in the production process; that is, through the production process, the factor owners not only recover the original value but also achieve appreciation. This “appreciation” portion, aside from being used for the consumption of the respective factor owners themselves, is mainly used for expanded reproduction. Although the production structure includes the two major departments of means of production production and means of consumption production, the ultimate result of expanded reproduction in both departments is still to increase the supply of consumer goods. The problem is that, from a macroeconomic perspective, at a given point in time the total value contained in final consumer goods always exceeds the sum of wage income distributed to workers and consumption income distributed to factor owners. After realizing value compensation and physical compensation in both departments, there remains a gap in the realization of products produced by the department producing means of consumption. The size of this gap depends on the growth and amount of consumption by factor owners. Because the limit of workers’ consumption is their wage income, while the limit of factor owners’ consumption, in terms of their disposable consumption income, is their own physiological limits (human consumption capacity is finite), not their purchasing power limits. Therefore, when factor owners are a minority, there is always a contradiction between the production and realization of final consumer goods, and resolving this contradiction can only be achieved through the collective ownership of the means of production by all workers, i.e., public ownership of the various means of production other than labor power.

在市场经济的生产中，生产要素分别属于不同的所有者，所有者凭借各自生产要素的所有权取得收入，虽然这些收入都是由劳动者创造的，劳动者作为劳动力的所有者只取得与其必要劳动价值相等的收入即工资，劳动者创造的剩余劳动价值被其他要素所有者“分享”和占有。地主凭借土地的所有权获得地租，房东凭借房屋的所有权取得房租，银行凭借资金的所有权取得利息，设备出租者凭借设备所有权取得租金，企业主凭借投入资本所有权取得利润。除了劳动力的所有者外，其他要素所有者取得的“收入”是指超过了投入生产过程中的要素原值的部分，即通过生产过程，要素所有者不仅仅回收了原值，而且都实现了增殖。这个“增殖”部分，除了用于各要素所有者自身的消费以外，主要用于扩大再生产。虽然生产结构包括生产资料生产和消费资料生产的两大部类，但两大部类扩大再生产的最终结果仍然是增加消费品的供给。问题是，从宏观经济来看，在确定时间点最终消费品包含的价值总量总是超过分配给劳动者的工资收入和分配给要素所有者的消费收入之和，在实现两大部类的价值补偿和实物补偿之后，消费资料生产部类生产的产品实现仍然存在缺口，其缺口的大小取决于要素所有者消费的增长和消费的多少。因为劳动者消费的极限是其工资收入，而要素所有者消费的极限就其可供消费的收入而言，是其自身生理的限制（人的消费能力是有限的），而不是其支付能力的限制。因此，在要素所有者为少数人的情况下，最终消费品的生产和实现始终存在着矛盾，而解决这个矛盾，也只能是全体劳动者共同占有生产要素，即包括除劳动力之外的各种生产要素的生产资料的公有制。

Therefore, the form and structure of ownership of the means of production determine the form of distribution, thereby determining the balance between aggregate supply and aggregate demand, and affecting the sustainable development of the macroeconomy. As Marx pointed out, under the conditions of private ownership where the means of production are privately held by a minority, the organizational form of enterprises and the mode of labor production adopt the form of wage labor, so that the minority, by virtue of their ownership of the means of production, appropriate the surplus value created by wage workers, and the distribution of surplus value among the owners of the means of production is distribution according to capital, i.e., sharing surplus value in proportion to the size of the advanced capital each has invested in the enterprise. The larger the advanced capital one invests in the enterprise, the larger the share of profit transformed from surplus value one obtains. Moreover, under the law of market competition, capital increasingly accumulates and concentrates in the hands of a minority. Under the law of capital accumulation, the polarization of capital ownership among capital owners leads to a polarization of capital income, which in turn further exacerbates the polarization of capital ownership among capital owners. Therefore, in a market economy based on private ownership, the polarization of income distribution and wealth possession is an inevitable result of the law of market competition, the law of capital accumulation, and the law of income distribution, and is independent of human will.

因此，生产资料的所有权形式和结构决定了分配形式，从而决定了总供给与总需求的平衡，并影响到宏观经济的可持续发展。正如马克思指出，在生产资料为少数人私人占有的私有制条件下，企业的组织方式和生产劳动方式就采用了雇佣劳动力的形式，从而少数人凭借对生产资料的所有权而占有雇佣劳动者创造的剩余价值，而生产资料所有者之间对剩余价值的分配是按资分配，即按照其投入到企业的预付资本的大小来分享剩余价值。谁投入的企业预付资本越大，其分享的剩余价值转化的利润份额就越大。并且在市场竞争的规律作用下，资本越来越向少数人集聚和集中。在资本积累规律的作用下，资本所有者因为资本占有的两极分化，导致了资本收入的两极分化，反过来又进一步加剧了资本所有者资本占有的两极分化。因此，以私有制为基础的市场经济存在收入分配和财富占有的两极分化是市场竞争规律、资本积累规律和收入分配规律的必然结果，是不以人的意志为转移的。

Only under conditions of public or collective ownership of the means of production do the organizational form of enterprises and the process of production labor truly reflect labor equality. Workers do not obtain income by virtue of ownership of capital, nor can they obtain different incomes by virtue of different capital holdings. Workers only obtain income based on the quantity and quality of labor they invest in production, i.e., distribution according to work. Marx pointed out, “Any distribution of the means of consumption is only a consequence of the distribution of the conditions of production themselves. The distribution of the conditions of production, however, shows the nature of the mode of production itself. For example, the capitalist mode of production is based on the fact that the material conditions of production are in the hands of non-workers in the form of capital and landed property, while the masses possess only the personal condition of production, namely labor power. If the material conditions of production are the collective property of the workers themselves, then a different distribution of the means of consumption from that of the present will likewise result.” That is to say, private ownership of the means of production determines distribution according to capital, and under market economy conditions this inevitably leads to an increasingly polarized income distribution. Public ownership of the means of production, on the other hand, determines distribution according to work, and the income disparities resulting from distribution according to work are not large and have certain limits.

只有在生产资料公有或者集体占有的条件下，企业的组织形式和生产劳动过程才体现出真正的劳动平等，劳动者都没有凭借资本的所有权而取得收入，更不能凭借资本占有的不同而取得不同的收入，劳动者只有凭借其投入生产的劳动数量和质量来取得收入，即按劳分配。马克思指出，“消费资料的任何一种分配，都不过是生产条件本身分配的结果；而生产条件的分配，则表现生产方式本身的性质。例如，资本主义生产方式的基础是：生产的物质条件以资本和地产的形式掌握在非劳动者手中，而人民大众所有的只是生产的人身条件，即劳动力。既然生产的要素是这样分配的，那么自然就产生现在这样的消费资料的分配。如果生产的物质条件是劳动者自己的集体财产，那么同样要产生一种和现在不同的消费资料的分配。”也就是说，生产资料私有制决定的是按资分配，而且在市场经济条件下必然是日益两极分化的收入分配。而生产资料公有制决定的是按劳分配，而按劳分配导致的收入差别不大，是有一定限度的。

(3) Income Distribution Disparities and Market Regulation and Government Macroeconomic Regulation

（三）收入分配差距与市场调节和政府宏观调控

In macroeconomic analysis, we see that in a market economy based on private ownership of the means of production as the mainstay and foundation, under the effects of the laws of market competition, capital accumulation, and distribution according to capital, the polarization of social income distribution and the polarization of wealth possession are inevitable trends and outcomes. In the preceding analysis, we did not consider the role of government; now we bring government into the analytical framework. Faced with the polarization of income distribution, what should government do? Before answering “how to regulate the polarization of social income distribution,” one must first answer “why should the polarization of social income be regulated,” or in other words, “what serious consequences will the polarization of social income lead to?” We have already explained earlier that the polarization of social income distribution leads to insufficient effective demand in society, which in turn leads to a contradiction between production and realization of products, thereby causing interruption and unsustainability in macroeconomic operation, and even triggering economic crises. The petty-bourgeois economist Joseph Stiglitz also recognized the problems brought by inequality in income distribution. In his book *The Price of Inequality*, he writes, “Taking money from those at the bottom and giving it to those at the top lowers consumption, because high-income individuals consume a smaller proportion of their income than low-income individuals (those at the top save 15 to 25 percent of their income, while those at the bottom spend all of their income). The result: until and unless something else happens, like an increase in investment or exports, aggregate demand in the economy will be less than what the economy can supply—which means there will be unemployment.” Therefore, the polarization of income distribution triggers overproduction due to insufficient effective demand and underutilization of resources, such as underutilization of labor resources (unemployment), low enterprise capacity utilization (idle machinery and factory buildings), or idleness of various means of production.

在宏观经济分析中，我们看到在生产资料私有制为主体和基础的市场经济中，在市场竞争规律、资本积累规律、按资分配规律的作用下，社会收入分配的两极分化和财富占有的两极分化是必然的趋势和结果。在前面的分析中，我们都没有考虑政府的作用，现在把政府纳入分析框架。面临收入分配的两极分化，政府应该如何作为呢？在回答“怎样对社会收入分配两极分化进行调控”之前，一定先要回答“为什么要对社会收入两极分化进行调控”，或者说“社会收入的两极分化会导致什么严重的后果呢”。前面我们已经阐述了社会收入分配的两极分化会导致社会的有效需求不足，进而导致产品生产与产品实现之间的矛盾，从而导致宏观经济运行的中断和不可持续，甚至会引发经济危机。小资产阶级的经济学家斯蒂格里茨也认识到收入分配不平等所带来的问题，他在《不平等的代价》一书中写道，“把钱从底层群体转移到上层群体降低了消费，因为高收入者对于其收入的消费比例要小于低收入者（上层群体的人将其收入的15%～25%用于储蓄，而底层群体的人会花掉所有的收入）。这样的结果就是：直到并且除非某种其他情况出现，比如投资或者出口的增加，否则经济中的总需求将会小于该经济能供给的——也就意味着会出现失业。”因此，收入分配的两极分化会引发有效需求不足的生产过剩和资源利用的不足，比如劳动力资源利用的不足（失业）、企业开工率不足（生产机器、厂房的闲置）或者各种生产资料的闲置。

So how does market regulation itself resolve the problem of insufficient effective demand? Insufficient effective demand means overproduction—two sides of the same coin. From the microeconomic perspective, enterprises naturally reduce production, which will lead to the idleness or waste of various factors of production, thereby lowering the income of enterprise capital owners, i.e., the profit rate, and subsequently triggering reductions in the returns on various factors of production such as interest rates, land rent rates, and rental rates. This is a situation that all capital owners are unwilling to see. “America is paying a high price for the inequality that is increasingly ravaging our economy—lower productivity, lower efficiency, lower growth, and more instability—so the gains from reducing this inequality (at least at the current high level of inequality) far outweigh any possible costs.” [6]6 Joseph E. Stiglitz, *The Price of Inequality: How Today’s Divided Society Endangers Our Future* (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2012), p. 103. [The original Chinese text cites this as a quotation from Stiglitz; the English rendering here follows the published English edition.] Of course, capital owners do not only propose solutions from the supply side; they also seek solutions from the demand side. On the one hand, they encourage high-income earners to engage in luxury consumption rather than saving for future expenditure; on the other hand, they encourage low-income earners to engage in debt-financed consumption by borrowing against future income, advocating a “carpe diem” philosophy of excessive consumption and debt-financed consumption—for example, developing financial innovations such as “auto loans,” “housing loans,” “student loans,” and “consumer credit loans,” as well as a large number of financial derivatives built on this foundation. It should be said that this kind of consumption that borrows against future income does temporarily resolve the immediate problem of overproduction. However, in the long run, the future contradiction between supply and demand will become even more pronounced. Because the majority of workers in society shift income intended for future consumption to the present, this reduces their future consumption with purchasing power, and they must also bear the interest costs of this credit-financed consumption, thereby reducing the total income available for consumption. Therefore, developing financial credit consumption only postpones the contradiction between insufficient effective demand and excess supply; it does not fundamentally resolve the problem of polarization in income distribution. Of course, when effective demand is insufficient and production supply is in excess, idle capital lacks sufficient real economy investment channels; it can only circulate and multiply within the financial industry system, leading to the expansion and bubbleization of the virtual financial economy.

那么市场调节自身是如何解决有效需求不足的问题呢？有效需求不足就意味着生产过剩，是一个硬币的两面，从微观经济层面来看，企业当然是减产，将会导致各种生产要素的闲置或者浪费，从而降低企业的资本所有者的收益即利润率，后续会引发降低利息率、地租率、租金率等各种生产要素的收益。这种情况是全体资本所有者都不愿意看到的事情。“美国正在为越来越重创我们经济的不平等付出高昂代价——降低了的生产率、降低了的效率、降低了的增长以及更多的不稳定，因此，减少这种不平等所带来的收益（至少就目前这种高度不平等而言）要远远超出可能产生的任何成本。”当然，资本所有者并非仅仅从供给侧提出解决方案，他们还会从需求侧寻求解决方案。一方面鼓励高收入者不要为未来支出而储蓄的奢侈消费，另一方面鼓励低收入者透支未来收入的借贷消费，倡导过度消费、透支消费的“及时享乐主义”，比如，发展“汽车贷款”“住房贷款”“助学贷款”“消费信用贷款”等金融创新工具以及建立在此基础上的大量金融衍生工具。应该说，这种透支未来收入的消费确实暂时解决了眼前的生产过剩问题，但是，从长期来看，未来的供求矛盾将会更加突出。因为作为社会大多数的劳动者把用于未来消费的收入转移到当今来消费，就会减少未来的有支付能力的消费，而且还要为此信用透支消费承担利息成本，从而减少可用于消费的总收入。因此，发展金融信贷消费只是延缓了有效需求不足和供给过剩的矛盾，并没有从根本上解决收入的两极分化问题。当然，当有效需求不足、生产供给过剩时，闲置的资本没有足够的实体经济投资渠道，它们只能在金融行业系统内循环增殖，导致虚拟金融经济的膨胀和泡沫化。

Now let us bring government into the discussion. How does government resolve problems such as insufficient effective demand caused by the polarization of income distribution? On the one hand, government seeks to reduce the income of high-income earners; on the other hand, it increases the income of low-income earners. Government imposes progressive income taxes on high-income earners—the higher the income, the more tax paid—thereby reducing their disposable income. Government ensures and increases the income of low-income earners through a健全的社会保障 [sound social security system], such as providing unemployment insurance for the unemployed, mandating that enterprises pay medical insurance for workers, providing pension security for retirees, and setting and raising minimum wage levels. Government provides public goods such as basic free education through taxation, thereby reducing low-income earners’ consumption expenditures on education, which correspondingly increases their consumption capacity in other areas. To increase demand, government even invests not only in infrastructure but also in competitive market sectors, thereby addressing the problems of insufficient demand and overproduction and stimulating economic growth. However, these government actions only mitigate or slow down the polarization of income; they do not truly resolve the root cause of the polarization of income distribution, namely, the polarization of private ownership of productive capital and the consequent polarization of possession of surplus value obtained through it. What capital owners obtain is mainly not income from their own labor, but income distributed according to capital by virtue of their capital possession. The polarization of wealth and capital possession leads to the polarization of income distributed according to capital. Government progressive income taxes and inheritance taxes cannot resolve the polarization of wealth and capital possession in market competition, and therefore cannot truly resolve the polarization of income distribution. As Thomas Piketty concluded in *Capital in the Twenty-First Century* through empirical research on capitalist market economies based on private ownership: “Inequality with respect to capital is always greater than inequality with respect to labor, and the distribution of capital ownership (and of capital income) is always more concentrated than the distribution of labor income.” [7]7 Thomas Piketty, *Capital in the Twenty-First Century*, trans. Arthur Goldhammer (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2014), p. 244. [The original Chinese text cites this as a quotation from Piketty; the English rendering here follows the published English translation.] Therefore, it is impossible to avoid the polarization and the trend toward polarization caused by a market economy based on private ownership through the regulation of government macro-taxation and welfare policies. Consequently, it is also impossible to resolve the problems of insufficient effective demand, relative overproduction, and long-term macroeconomic depression in a private-ownership market economy.

现在把政府加入进来讨论，政府是如何解决收入分配的两极分化导致的有效需求不足等问题的呢？政府一方面是想方设法减少高收入者的收入，另一方面增加低收入者的收入。政府会向高收入者征收累进的收入所得税，收入越高者缴纳的税也越多，从而降低其可支配收入。政府通过健全的社会保障，比如给失业者提供失业保险，强制企业为劳动者缴纳医疗保险，给退休者提供养老保障，制定和提高最低工资水平等，来保障和增加低收入者的收入。政府通过税收来提供基础免费教育等公共品，从而减少低收入者的教育等消费支付，可以相应地增加低收入者其他方面的消费能力。甚至为了增加需求，政府不仅仅在基础设施方面投资，还在市场竞争性领域进行投资，从而解决需求不足和生产过剩问题，拉动经济增长。但是，这些政府行为也只是缓和或者减缓了收入的两极分化，并没有真正解决导致收入分配两极分化的根本原因，即生产资本私人占有的两极分化并以此取得的剩余价值占有的两极分化。资本所有者取得的主要不是其劳动的收入，而是其凭借资本占有取得按资分配的收入，财富和资本占有的分化，导致按资分配收入的分化。政府的累进收入所得税和遗产税并不能解决市场竞争中财富和资本占有的两极分化，也就不能真正解决收入分配的两极分化。正如托马斯·皮凯蒂在《21世纪资本论》通过实证研究以私有制为基础的资本主义市场经济得出的结论是“资本导致的不平等总比劳动导致的不平等更严重，资本所有权（及资本收入）的分配总比劳动收入的分配更为集中。”因此，企图通过政府宏观税收和福利政策的调控来避免以私有制为基础的市场经济造成的两极分化和两极分化趋势是不可能的，也就不能解决私有制市场经济的有效需求不足、生产相对过剩以及长期宏观经济萧条问题。

If the means of production are under the common ownership of the workers, and workers obtain income solely on the basis of the amount of labor they contribute, then income disparities among workers are small, and there will be no polarization or tendency toward polarization. This is because workers all obtain income based on the quantity and quality of the labor they contribute. The only difference among workers within the same period of labor time is the quality of labor, which in turn depends on the workers’ qualifications and skill level. Unless there are special reasons, differences in workers’ qualifications and skill levels are not large, so the differences in labor contribution among workers within the same period of labor time are not large, and consequently the income differences they obtain are not large. Moreover, as regards the differences in labor quality and skill level that cause differences in labor quality, low-qualification and low-skill workers, through a period of imitation and learning, will actually narrow the gap with high-qualification and high-skill workers, thereby reducing the income differences among workers that arise from different labor contributions. If differences in household income distribution arise from workers’ own disabilities (such as physical handicaps) or from differences in the expenses needed to support children and the elderly, these can be regulated through government social security measures, progressive personal income taxes, tax deductions for dependent care, and other means, ensuring that the income gap in the entire society remains within a reasonable range. When social income differences are not large, this can promote a virtuous cycle of production and consumption, namely: expansion of production — expansion of income — expansion of consumption — further expansion of production (where expansion of production is not only quantitative increase; after quantitative needs are met, it manifests as improvement in product quality and increased diversity). This ensures the smooth production and realization of products, as well as the sustainable and rapid development of the entire social macroeconomy.

如果生产资料是劳动者共同所有的条件下，劳动者只凭借付出的劳动多少来取得收入，劳动者的收入差距不大，而且不会出现两极分化和两极分化的趋势。因为劳动者都凭借付出的劳动数量和质量来取得收入。劳动者在相同的劳动时间内的差别仅仅是劳动的质量，而劳动质量又取决于劳动者的素质和劳动熟练程度等，如果不是特殊原因，劳动者的素质和劳动熟练程度差别不大，这样劳动者在相同的劳动时间内的劳动付出差别不大，因而取得的收入差别就不大。而且就导致劳动质量差别的劳动素质和劳动熟练程度差别而言，低素质劳动者和低熟练程度的劳动者通过一段时间的模仿学习，反而会缩小与高素质和高熟练程度劳动者的差距，从而使得劳动者因凭借劳动付出不同而取得的收入差别缩小。如果是因为劳动者自身缺陷（比如残疾）、劳动者负担的小孩和老人需要的花费不同导致的家庭收入分配差别，可以通过政府的社会保障措施、累进的个人收入所得税、赡养支出税收减免等手段的调控，保证整个社会的收入差距在合理范围内。社会收入差别不大就能够促进生产与消费的良性循环，即生产扩大—收入扩大—消费扩大—生产再扩大（生产扩大不仅仅表现为量的增加，在数量方面满足后会表现为产品质量的提高和多样性的增加），从而保证了产品生产和产品实现的顺畅和整个社会宏观经济的可持续的、快速的发展。

(4) Income Distribution Gaps and Sustainable Economic Development

（四）收入分配差距与经济的可持续发展

Under the laws of competition, capital accumulation, and distribution according to capital that operate in a market economy based on private ownership, polarization of income distribution is inevitable. Therefore, it can be said that polarization of income distribution is an inevitable outcome of the development of a market economy based on private ownership, meaning that capitalist economic growth and development inevitably bring about polarization of income distribution, and this trend cannot be changed even with government regulation. However, conversely, what impact does polarization of income distribution have on economic growth and development? We will further analyze the mechanism through which income distribution gaps affect economic development.

在以私有制为基础的市场经济的竞争规律、资本积累规律和按资分配规律的作用下，收入分配的两极分化是不可避免的。因此，可以这样说，收入分配的两极分化是以私有制为基础的市场经济发展的必然结果，也就是说资本主义经济增长和发展必然带来收入分配的两极分化，并且在政府的调控下也无法改变这个趋势。但是，反过来，收入分配的两极分化对经济增长和发展又会带来怎样的影响呢？我们将进一步分析收入分配差距对经济发展影响的机理。

It is generally believed that a reasonable income distribution gap, or a moderate income distribution gap — such as the gap resulting from distribution according to work — has a positive promoting effect on economic development. For example, “more work, more reward” can encourage workers to increase their labor input; enterprises that first engage in innovation obtain surplus-value income, which can encourage enterprises to engage in technological and managerial innovation to raise labor productivity and develop new products; moderate income differences can bring about gradient consumption of products of different quality and price levels, and as economic growth brings about common income growth for people at different income levels, this can promote the gradient upgrading of industries and products. Moreover, such moderate income distribution gaps do not lead to widespread insufficient effective demand and serious overproduction in the entire society, and can promote the sustainable development of the social macroeconomy.

一般认为，合理的收入分配差距或者适度的收入分配差距，比如按劳分配导致的收入分配差距，对经济的发展具有正向的促进作用。比如，“多劳多得”可以鼓励劳动者更多的劳动投入；率先进行创新的企业获得超额剩余价值收入，可以鼓励企业进行技术创新和管理创新以提高劳动生产率和开发新产品等；适度的收入差别可以带来对不同品质和价格水平的产品的梯度消费，并随着经济增长带来不同收入水平人群的收入的共同增长，可以促进产业和产品的梯度升级。而且这种适度收入分配差距不会带来整个社会普遍的有效需求不足和生产严重过剩的现象，可以促进社会宏观经济的可持续发展。

However, polarized income gaps have a negative hindering effect on macroeconomic development. First, polarization of income distribution leads to the problem of insufficient effective demand. On the one hand, the consumption needs of lower-income earners cannot be met because they lack purchasing power; on the other hand, the higher the income of higher-income earners, the lower their marginal propensity to consume and the higher their marginal propensity to save. This leads to the inability to fully sell already-produced products, resulting in overproduction; products cannot be converted into money through consumption, thereby hindering the cycle of social reproduction. At this point, economic development relies more on increased investment demand (and, in an open economy, increased product exports). However, whether it is investment in the production of capital goods or investment in the production of consumer goods, it must ultimately be transformed into an increase in the supply of consumer goods. The contradiction between supply and demand accumulates at a higher level without being resolved, ultimately slowing and hindering economic growth and development, and may even trigger an economic crisis.

而两极分化的收入差距却对宏观经济发展带来了负向的阻碍作用。第一，收入分配的两极分化会导致有效需求不足问题。收入分配的两极分化，一方面是收入较低者的消费需求因为没有支付能力而得不到满足；另一方面是收入较高者收入越高，边际消费倾向越低，边际储蓄倾向越高。这样就会导致已经生产出的产品无法完全销售出去，出现生产过剩，产品无法通过消费转化为货币，从而阻碍社会再生产的循环。这时，经济发展更多依赖的是投资需求的增加（在开放经济中还有产品出口的增加），但是，不管是资本品生产的投资，还是消费品生产的投资，最终还是要转化为消费品供给的增加，供给与需求的矛盾在更大层次上积累而并没有解决，最终会延缓、阻碍经济的增长和发展，甚至会发生经济危机。

Second, polarization of income distribution damages the improvement of social human resources. The income of low-income and extremely low-income earners is only sufficient to maintain basic survival, leaving them unable to invest in more education. Moreover, generally, low-income families have higher fertility rates, which further reduces their per capita income level, leading to even less investment in their own and their children’s education, further affecting the improvement of human resources. Because of the lack of educational investment, extremely low and low-income earners may experience intergenerational transmission of poverty, exacerbating the polarization of income distribution. Human resources are the most important factor in economic development; damage to the quality of human resources caused by polarization of income distribution will inevitably harm sustained economic growth and development.

第二，收入分配的两极分化会损害社会人力资源水平的提高。低收入者和极低收入者的收入仅仅能够维持基本的生存，无力进行更多教育的投资，而且一般情况下，低收入家庭的生育率更高，从而进一步降低了其人均收入水平，导致对其自身和子女教育的投资更少，进一步影响到了人力资源水平的提高。极低和低收入者因为缺乏教育投资，会导致贫困的代际传递，加剧收入分配的两极分化。人力资源是经济发展最重要的要素，因收入分配的两极分化而导致的对人力资源素质的损害，必然会损害到经济持续增长和发展。

Third, polarization of income distribution damages the natural environment and undermines social stability. Low-income earners may resort to illegal logging, draining ponds to catch all the fish, and other means to survive, thereby damaging the natural environment on which human survival depends. Polarization of income distribution leads to the differentiation of social strata, causing antagonism and conflict between social strata, and giving rise to social governance problems. For example, the phenomenon of shantytowns around cities in Latin American countries. When low-income and extremely low-income earners cannot get enough to eat, they may take to the streets to protest. To survive, low-income and extremely low-income earners may also resort to illegal means to obtain income, requiring the government to invest more resources in maintaining public order rather than developing the economy to increase people’s well-being. In more serious cases, extremely low-income earners may even resort to more intense means such as riots and revolution to resist society. Under a market mechanism based on private ownership, the polarization of income distribution cannot be resolved. Governments attempt to expand income redistribution by raising tax rates to alleviate the polarization of income distribution. However, excessively high progressive capital income taxes (corporate income taxes) damage the incentive for capital owners to increase investment. For example, when different political parties come to power in the United States, based on different considerations, they always cycle between raising and cutting taxes. Excessively high progressive personal income taxes also damage the incentive for workers to increase their labor input.

第三，收入分配的两极分化会破坏自然环境和损害社会稳定。低收入者可能会采取盗伐森林、竭泽而渔等手段来维持生存，从而损害人类生存的自然环境。收入分配的两极分化会引起社会阶层的分化，导致社会阶层间的对立和冲突，引发社会治理难题。比如，拉美国家城市周边的贫民窟现象。当低收入者和极低收入者食不果腹时，他们可能会走向街头抗议。为了生存，低收入者和极低收入者也可能会采取非法的手段获取收入，政府需要投入更多资源来维持治安而不是发展经济来增加人民福祉。更严重的情况是极低收入者甚至可能采取暴动、革命等更激烈的方式反抗社会。而在以私有制为基础的市场机制下，收入分配的两极分化无法解决，政府试图通过提高税率来扩大收入再分配，缓解收入分配的两极分化。但是，过高的累进资本所得税（企业所得税）会损害资本所有者增加投资的积极性，例如美国不同政党上台执政，基于不同的考虑总是在增税和减税间循环施策。而过高的累进个人所得税也会损害劳动者增加劳动投入的积极性。

So what kind of income distribution gap is reasonable for a society? It is generally believed that when the Gini coefficient is below 0.4, social income distribution is relatively reasonable; when the Gini coefficient is above 0.4, polarization of income distribution begins to appear; when the Gini coefficient is above 0.5, society experiences relatively serious polarization of income distribution. When analyzing the gap between rich and poor in a macroeconomy, we should look not only at the income distribution gap, but more importantly at the gap in wealth ownership. This is because the expansion and polarization of the wealth ownership gap leads to the expansion and polarization of the income gap from distribution according to capital (capital gains), and this is the most fundamental and important cause of the expansion and polarization of the entire income distribution gap. The polarization of wealth ownership, in turn, is an inevitable result of the operation of the laws of competition, capital accumulation, and distribution according to capital under the private ownership of productive capital (private ownership of the means of production) in market competition.

那么一个社会什么样的收入分配差距是合理的呢？一般认为，基尼系数低于0.4，社会收入分配是相对合理的；基尼系数高于0.4，收入分配两极分化开始显现；基尼系数高于0.5，社会就出现比较严重的收入分配两极分化。我们在分析一个宏观经济体的贫富差距时，不仅仅要看收入分配的差距，更重要的是要看财富占有的差距。因为财富占有差距的扩大和两极分化，会导致按资分配（资本利得）收入差距的扩大和两极分化，这才是整个收入分配差距扩大和两极分化的最根本和最重要的原因。而财富占有的分化又是基于市场竞争中生产资本私有制（生产资料私有制）的竞争规律、资本积累规律和按资分配规律作用的必然结果。

III. Marxist Economics from the Micro to the Macro

三、从微观到宏观的马克思主义经济学

(1) The Micro-Macro Analytical Framework of Marxist Economics

（一）马克思主义经济学的微宏观分析架构

Most existing textbooks on Marxist political economy and the theoretical system of Marxist economics adopt a dichotomous structure of a capitalist part and a socialist part, with the capitalist part constructed on the framework of Marx’s *Capital*. These textbooks do not incorporate socialist micro- and macroeconomic analysis and capitalist micro- and macroeconomic analysis into a unified theoretical analytical framework of economics that proceeds from the micro to the macro. The existing theoretical system of Marxist political economy emphasizes the analysis of the essence of economic relations, but provides insufficient concrete analysis of economic agents, economic processes, and economic phenomena. To enable Marxist political economy to provide a more solid theoretical foundation, more comprehensive guidance, and effective policy recommendations for the development of the socialist market economy, it is necessary to creatively transform the traditional textbook system and theoretical system of Marxist political economy, replacing the traditional dichotomous economic theoretical system of a capitalist part and a socialist part with a unified economic theoretical system centered on the “firm” engaged in production. The theoretical analysis of Marxist macroeconomics must be constructed on the basis of Marxist microeconomic theoretical analysis.

现有的马克思主义政治经济学教材和马克思主义经济学理论体系大多是采用资本主义部分和社会主义部分的二分法结构，其中资本主义部分建构在马克思《资本论》的理论体系框架之上。现有的马克思主义政治经济学教材没有把社会主义微观、宏观经济分析和资本主义微观、宏观经济分析纳入到统一的从微观到宏观的经济学理论分析架构。现有的马克思主义政治经济学理论体系架构注重对经济关系的本质分析，而对经济主体、经济过程和经济现象的具体分析不足。要实现马克思主义政治经济学为社会主义市场经济发展提供更切实的理论基础、更全面的指导作用和有效的政策建议，需要对传统马克思主义政治经济学教材体系和理论体系进行创造性转换，替代传统以资本主义部分和社会主义部分的二分法的经济学理论体系，构建以从事生产的“厂商”为中心的统一的经济学理论体系。把马克思主义宏观经济学理论分析建构在马克思主义微观经济理论分析的基础之上。

We may tentatively call this Marxist economics centered on the “firm” engaged in production “modern Marxist economics.” Marx’s economic theory and economic thought, as primarily embodied in *Capital*, constitute the theoretical foundation and main theoretical source of modern Marxist economics. Modern Marxist economics is called Marxist economics because it inherits and adheres to the theoretical core of Marx’s economics and absorbs the latest research findings of Marxist scholars both in China and abroad. Modern Marxist economics also critically draws on the rational components of Western economic theory.

我们姑且把构建以从事生产的“厂商”为中心的马克思主义经济学，称为“现代马克思主义经济学”。主要体现在《资本论》中的马克思的经济学理论和经济思想是“现代马克思主义经济学”的理论基础和主要理论来源。现代马克思主义经济学之所以称为马克思主义经济学，是因为其继承和坚持了马克思经济学的理论内核，且吸收了中外马克思主义学者的最新研究成果。现代马克思主义经济学还批判地借鉴西方经济学理论的合理成分。

The theoretical system of Marxist political economy constructed by existing textbooks on Marxist political economy is still mainly modeled on the theoretical system of Marx’s *Capital* and reasonably extended from it. Although it has developed Marxist political economy theory to some extent by adding socialist economic analysis in separate books, separate parts, sections, chapters, or subsections, it is far from meeting the needs of the construction, reform, and development of the modern socialist market economy. The analysis of the socialist economy in the existing textbook system lacks good self-consistency with the conceptual categories, theoretical viewpoints, and logical system used in its analysis of the capitalist economy. This leads people to believe that the part analyzing the socialist economy has a strong “ideological” and “sermonizing” character, especially after China implemented the socialist market economy reform. This has also seriously damaged the scientific nature, truthfulness, and academic reputation of Marxist economics.

现有的马克思主义政治经济学教材所建构的马克思主义政治经济学理论体系，仍然主要以马克思《资本论》的理论体系构建为蓝本并进行合理扩展，虽然其对马克思主义政治经济学理论有所发展，以单独书、单独部分、篇、章或者节的形式增加了社会主义经济分析，但远不能适应现代的社会主义市场经济建设、改革和发展需要。现有教材体系中对社会主义经济的分析，与其对资本主义经济分析的概念范畴、理论观点、逻辑体系缺乏很好的自洽性，导致人们认为社会主义经济分析部分具有浓重的“意识形态”“说教色彩”，尤其是中国实行社会主义市场经济改革后情况更是如此，这样也严重损害了马克思主义经济学的科学性、真理性和学术声誉。

Modern Marxist economics must construct its theoretical system centered on the “firm” engaged in production in order to meet the needs of the construction, reform, and development of the socialist market economy. First, the scope of research of modern Marxist economics greatly exceeds that of the capitalist economy; it must necessarily include the socialist planned economy and the socialist market economy, and also discuss the primitive communal economy, the slave economy, the feudal economy, and the higher stage of socialism or the higher stage of communism. However, the scope of research of *Capital* is limited to the capitalist economy. Marx clearly stated in the preface to *Capital*, “What I have to examine in this work is the capitalist mode of production, and the relations of production and exchange corresponding to it.” Second, the purpose of research of modern Marxist economics is mainly to serve the needs of the construction of the socialist market economy, which is already different from the “revolutionary” purpose of Marx’s *Capital*. Marx’s *Capital* “revealed the laws of motion of the capitalist economy, expounded the laws of the emergence, development, and demise of capitalism, and, based on the analysis of the internal contradictions of capitalism, demonstrated the historical inevitability of capitalism being replaced by communism, thereby laying a solid theoretical foundation for scientific socialism. This work achieved a revolutionary transformation in the field of political economy and founded Marxist political economy. It combined high scientific rigor with revolutionary character, providing a powerful theoretical weapon for the liberation cause of the working class and the laboring people.” Marx himself also pointed out in the preface to *Capital* that the ultimate purpose of *Capital* was to reveal the “laws of motion” of the capitalist economy. Therefore, the theoretical system structure constructed by *Capital* was not designed to meet the needs of socialist economic development, and explaining the socialist economy based on the theoretical system construction of *Capital* will inevitably have shortcomings. Consequently, the construction of the theoretical system of modern Marxist economics must achieve a creative transformation from “revolutionary needs” to “developmental needs.”

现代马克思主义经济学要以生产的“厂商”为中心建构经济学理论体系，是为了适应社会主义市场经济建设、改革和发展的需要。首先，现代的马克思主义经济学研究范围大大超过了资本主义经济，必须包括社会主义计划经济和社会主义市场经济，还要论及原始社会经济、奴隶社会经济、封建社会经济、社会主义高级阶段或共产主义高级阶段的经济。但是，《资本论》的研究范围仅仅为资本主义经济，马克思在《资本论》序言中明确指出，“我要在本书研究的，是资本主义生产方式以及和它相适应的生产关系和交换关系。”其次，现代的马克思主义经济学研究目的主要是为了服务于社会主义市场经济建设的需要，已经不同于马克思《资本论》的“革命”目的。马克思的《资本论》“揭示了资本主义社会的经济运动规律，阐述了资本主义产生、发展和灭亡的规律，根据对资本主义内在矛盾的分析，论证了资本主义为共产主义取代的历史必然性，为科学社会主义奠定了牢固的理论基础。这部著作在政治经济学领域实现了革命性的变革，创立了马克思主义的政治经济学。它把高度的科学性和革命性结合在一起，为工人阶级和劳动人民的解放事业提供了强大理论武器。”马克思自己在《资本论》序言中也指出《资本论》的最终目的是揭示资本主义社会的“经济运动规律”。因此，《资本论》所构建的理论体系结构并不是为了满足社会主义经济发展的需要，以《资本论》的理论体系建构来阐释社会主义经济一定会存在不足。由此，现代马克思主义经济学理论体系的构建必须实现从“革命需要”到“发展需要”的创造性转换。

Based on the above exposition, Marxist microeconomics can include the theory of the firm (i.e., the theory of the producer in a broad sense), the theory of consumer behavior, market theory (including the labor market, the money market, the means-of-production market, the capital goods market, and the consumer goods market), and the theory of market failure and government behavior. Why is it said that Marxist microeconomics must be centered on the theory of the firm? Because production is the core of social economic operation. The inputs of production involve the capital market (money market), the means-of-production market, and the labor market; the outputs of production involve the capital goods market (other firms) and the consumer goods market (consumers); the income from the products of production involves consumers (labor income) and the government (taxation); how production is organized involves the ownership forms and organizational forms of the firm, and so on.

基于上面阐述，马克思主义微观经济学可以包括厂商理论（即广义的生产者理论）、消费者行为理论、市场理论（包括劳动力市场、货币市场、生产资料市场、资本品市场、消费品市场）、市场失灵与政府行为理论。为什么说马克思主义微观经济学是要以厂商理论为中心呢？因为生产是社会经济运行的核心，生产的投入涉及资本市场（货币市场）、生产资料市场、劳动力市场，生产的产出涉及资本品市场（其他厂商）和消费品市场（消费者），生产的产品收入涉及消费者（劳动收入）和政府（税收），怎样组织生产又涉及厂商的所有制形式和组织形式，等等。

The theory of the firm can expound: (1) the theory of value augmentation and capital augmentation based on the labor theory of value and the theory of surplus value; (2) the theory of costs based on the theory of the price of labor power, the theory of the production of relative surplus value and absolute surplus value, and the theory of the externalization of internal costs; (3) the theory of profit based on the theory of surplus value, the theory of socially necessary labor value, and the theory of the circuit of capital; (4) the theory of micro-level income distribution within the enterprise (including the theory of income distribution of wages, interest, rent, ground-rent, and profit) based on the labor theory of value, the theory of surplus value, and the theory of ownership; (5) the theory of the production process based on the theory of public ownership and the theory of private ownership of the means of production; (6) the theory of simple reproduction and expanded reproduction based on the theory of capital accumulation; (7) the theory of enterprise organization and the theory of firm decision-making based on the theory of ownership, the theory of the division of labor within capital, and the theory of capital-labor relations, and so on.

厂商理论可以阐述：（1）基于劳动价值论和剩余价值论的价值增殖理论和资本增殖理论；（2）基于劳动力价格理论、相对剩余价值生产和绝对剩余价值生产理论、内部成本外部化理论的成本理论；（3）基于剩余价值理论、社会必要劳动价值理论、资本循环理论的利润理论；（4）基于劳动价值理论、剩余价值理论和所有制理论的企业内部微观收入分配理论（包括工资、利息、地租、房租、利润的收入分配理论）；（5）基于生产资料的公有制理论和私有制理论的生产过程理论；（6）基于资本积累的简单再生产理论和扩大再生产理论；（7）基于所有制理论、资本分工理论和劳资关系理论的企业组织理论和厂商决策理论，等等。

The theory of consumer behavior can expound the theory of consumer choice, preferences, and decision-making based on the labor theory of value, the theory of the price of labor power, the theory of the production and reproduction of labor power, and the theory of income distribution, and so on.

消费者行为理论可以阐述基于劳动价值论、劳动力价格理论、劳动力生产和再生产理论、收入分配理论的消费者选择、偏好和决策理论，等等。

Market theory can expound: (1) the theory of price based on the theory of value; (2) the theory of supply and demand based on the theory of socially necessary labor value and the theory of the division of labor; (3) the theory of the labor market based on the theory of the price of labor power and the theory of the production and reproduction of labor power; (4) the theory of the means-of-production market based on the theory of ownership and the theory of the organic composition of capital; (5) the theory of money, the theory of inflation, the theory of the money market, and the theory of the capital market based on the theory of the equivalent of value; (6) the theory of the market for capital goods and consumer goods based on the theory of the coordination of the two major departments; [n9] (7) the theory of market structure based on the theory of monopoly of ownership rights (theories of the competitive market, monopolistic competition market, oligopolistic competition market, and perfect monopoly market), and so on.

市场理论可以阐述：（1）基于价值理论的价格理论；（2）基于社会必要劳动价值理论和劳动分工理论的供求理论；（3）基于劳动力价格理论、劳动力生产和再生产理论的劳动力市场理论；（4）基于所有制理论和资本有机构成理论的生产资料市场理论；（5）基于价值等价物理论的货币理论、通货膨胀理论、货币市场理论和资本市场理论；（6）基于两大部类协调理论的资本品和消费品市场理论；（7）基于所有权垄断理论的市场结构理论（竞争性市场、垄断竞争市场、寡头竞争市场、完全垄断市场理论），等等。

The theory of market failure and government behavior can expound: (1) the theory of market failure based on the theory of the purpose of production and the theory of the contradiction between planned production within the individual firm and the anarchy of social production; (2) the theory of government behavior based on the theory of public principal-agent relationships, and so on.

市场失灵与政府行为理论可以阐述：（1）基于生产目的论和个体厂商生产有计划与社会生产无序论的市场失灵理论；（2）基于公共委托代理理论的政府行为理论，等等。

The theory of Marxist macroeconomics built on Marxist microeconomics can include: (1) a theory of national economic accounting based on the labor theory of value; (2) a theory of aggregate supply and aggregate demand based on the theory of equalization of the profit rate, the theory of the rising organic composition of capital, the theory of the tendency of the rate of profit to fall, and the theory of distribution between capital and labor; (3) a theory of aggregate labor supply and demand based on the theory of the industrial reserve army and the theory of the production and reproduction of labor power; (4) a theory of industrial structure based on the theory of coordination between the two departments; (5) a theory of finance based on the theory of the division of capital, the theory of insufficient effective demand, and the theory of the fictitious economy; (6) a theory of income distribution based on the theory of ownership and the theory of capital-labor relations; (7) a theory of economic growth based on the theory of coordination between production and consumption, the labor theory of value, the theory of the production and reproduction of labor power, the theory of ownership, and the theory of income distribution; (8) a theory of the economic cycle based on the theory of economic crisis; (9) a theory of economic regulation (including fiscal policy, monetary policy, public investment, government transfer payments, social security, economic planning, and other content) based on the theory of the market economy, the theory of capital accumulation, and the theory of income distribution; (10) a theory of regional economics based on the theory of uneven development and the theory of economies of scale; (11) a theory of the global economy (including theories of international trade, international investment, international finance, international flows of human capital, international technology transfer, and international institutional coordination) based on the theory of the development of productive forces and the theory of capital accumulation, and so on.

建立在马克思主义微观经济学之上的马克思主义宏观经济学理论可以包括：（1）基于劳动价值论的国民经济核算理论；（2）基于利润率平均化理论、资本有机构成上升理论、利润率下降趋势理论和劳资分配理论的总供给与总需求理论；（3）基于产业后备军理论和劳动力生产再生产理论的劳动力总供求理论；（4）基于两大部类协调理论的产业结构理论；（5）基于资本分工理论、有效需求不足理论和虚拟经济理论的金融理论；（6）基于所有制理论、劳资关系理论的收入分配理论；（7）基于生产消费协调理论、劳动价值理论、劳动力生产和再生产理论、所有制理论和收入分配理论的经济增长理论；（8）基于经济危机理论的经济周期理论；（9）基于市场经济理论、资本积累理论、收入分配理论的经济调节理论（包括财政政策、货币政策、公共投资、政府转移支付、社会保障、经济计划等内容）；（10）基于不平衡发展理论和规模经济理论的区域经济理论；（11）基于生产力发展理论和资本积累理论的全球经济理论（包括国际贸易、国际投资、国际金融、国际人力资本流动、国际技术转移、国际制度协同理论），等等。

(II) The Inner Unity of Marxist Macroeconomics and Microeconomics

（二）马克思主义宏观经济学与微观经济学的内在统一

The inner unity of Marxist macroeconomics and microeconomics is manifested in the fact that Marxist macroeconomics is built on the foundation of Marxist microeconomics. The holistic, dynamic, and long-term analysis of Marxist microeconomics naturally yields the conclusions of Marxist macroeconomics. The inner unity of Marxist microeconomics and macroeconomics is manifested in the fact that both are built on the same theoretical foundations, such as the labor theory of value, the theory of surplus value, the theory of ownership of the means of production, the theory of the value and price of labor power, the theory of socially necessary labor value, the theory of the average rate of profit, the theory of the turnover, circuit, and accumulation of capital, the theory of the division of capital, the theory of social reproduction, and so on. Moreover, these theories are interrelated and form an organic whole. Among the common theoretical foundations of Marxist microeconomics and macroeconomics, the core theories can be reduced to the labor theory of value, the theory of ownership, and the theory of distribution between capital and labor, while the innermost theoretical core is the labor theory of value, i.e., that all newly added value of commodities is created by living labor.

马克思主义宏观经济学与微观经济学的内在统一性，体现在马克思主义宏观经济学是建立在马克思主义微观经济学的基础之上。马克思主义微观经济学的整体的、动态的、长期的分析就自然地得出马克思主义宏观经济学的结论。马克思主义微观经济学与宏观经济学的内在统一，体现在二者都是建立在相同的理论基础之上，比如劳动价值论，剩余价值论，生产资料所有制理论，劳动力价值价格理论，社会必要劳动价值理论，平均利润率理论，资本周转、循环与积累理论，资本分工理论，社会再生产理论，等等，而且这些理论相互关联，构成一个有机整体。马克思主义微观经济学与宏观经济学共同的理论基础中核心的理论可以归结为劳动价值理论、所有制理论和劳资分配理论，而最核心的理论内核就是劳动价值理论，即商品新增加的价值都是由活劳动创造的。

In a capitalist market economy based on private ownership, capital is privately owned, and workers own only their own labor power. Through the production, circulation, exchange, and consumption of commodities, the value created by workers is distributed in the form of wages to workers, interest to money-capital owners, rent to landlords, rent to house owners, profit to functioning capital owners, and taxes to the government. Capital income in the form of interest, rent, profit, etc., aside from the portion used by its owners for personal consumption, is mainly used for saving, accumulation, and expanded reproduction. Under the law of market competition, while the total amount of capital expands sharply, the possession of capital undergoes severe polarization. Capital owners can only realize the valorization of the capital they possess by engaging in expanded reproduction to appropriate the surplus value created by workers. However, the valorization of capital depends not only on the production of products but, even more, on the realization of products. The realization of products ultimately depends on the size of the effective demand of the majority of workers, i.e., the amount of workers' wage income. Whether products can be realized is not only a problem faced by the individual microeconomic firm at the micro level but, even more, a problem faced by the smooth operation of the macroeconomy. This problem lies in the distribution between capital and labor, and its root cause lies in the problem of the ownership of capital, i.e., the non-unity of the owners of capital and the owners of labor power. The owners of capital are a minority, while the owners of labor power are the majority. Within the microeconomic entity, the enterprise, profit and wages are a pair of contradictions: the lower the wages, the higher the profit. The higher the profit, the greater the accumulation, and the more products from expanded reproduction. Yet the realization of these products requires higher wage income for workers. This pair of contradictions not only determines the cyclical fluctuations of the capitalist macroeconomy, even triggering economic crises, but also determines the expansion and contraction, even bankruptcy, of the operations of microeconomic entities, the enterprises. Therefore, Marxist economic analysis of the capitalist economy at the micro and macro levels possesses inner consistency.

在以私有制为基础的资本主义的市场经济中，资本为私人所有、劳动者只拥有自己的劳动力，通过商品的生产、流通、交换和消费，劳动者创造的价值被劳动者以工资、货币资本所有者以利息、地主以地租、房东以房租、职能资本所有者以利润、政府以税收等形式分配。以利息、租金、利润等形式存在的资本收入除了其所有者用于个人消费外，主要用于储蓄、积累和扩大再生产。在市场竞争规律的作用下，资本总额急剧扩大的同时，资本占有出现严重的两极分化。资本所有者只能通过扩大再生产来占有劳动者创造的剩余价值，才能实现其所占有资本的增殖。但是资本的增殖不仅仅依赖于产品的生产，更依赖于产品的实现。而产品的实现最终取决于大多数劳动者有支付能力的需求即劳动者工资收入的多少。产品能否实现不仅仅是一个微观经济厂商的微观个体面临的问题，更是一个宏观经济顺畅运行所面临的问题，而这个问题在于资本与劳动之间的分配问题，根源在于资本的所有制问题，即资本的所有者与劳动力的所有者不统一。资本的所有者是少数人，而劳动力的所有者是大多数人。在微观经济主体企业内，利润与工资是一对矛盾体，工资越少，利润越多。而利润越多，积累越多，扩大再生产的产品越多，但产品的实现却需要劳动者的工资收入越多。这对矛盾不仅仅决定资本主义宏观经济的周期性波动，甚至引发经济危机，也决定了微观经济主体企业运营的扩张与收缩，甚至破产。因此，马克思主义经济学对资本主义经济的微观分析和宏观分析具有内在一致性。

In a socialist market economy based on public ownership, the means of production or production capital is collectively owned by the working people, while labor power is individually owned. Through the market competition mechanism, the effective allocation of public capital and labor resources is achieved. Workers not only obtain wage income based on their labor contribution but also, as co-owners of public capital, share in the capital income in the form of profit created jointly by the working people. Although this capital income is not necessarily distributed to workers in the form of dividends, it provides workers with comprehensive social security, abundant educational and healthcare resources, and a continuously optimized living environment, thereby reducing workers' living expenses in these areas and improving their quality of life. More importantly, in public enterprises and the public sector of the economy, workers can obtain the part of value-added they themselves create, or, in other words, workers can obtain income in the form of wages that exceeds the value of labor power. Even if workers' temporary wage income is relatively low, the accumulated portion provides the possibility for greater future income for workers. That is to say, in a socialist market economy, the owners of public capital and the owners of labor power are unified, thereby overcoming the antagonistic contradiction between profit and wages and between supply and demand. Even if there are disparities in income based on the amount of labor contributed and a mismatch between supply structure and demand structure, these are kept within appropriate limits under the government's planned regulation and macroeconomic control, thereby ensuring the sustainable development of the macroeconomy.

在以公有制为基础的社会主义市场经济中，生产资料或生产资本为劳动者集体所有，劳动力为个人所有，通过市场竞争机制，实现公有资本和劳动力资源的有效分配。劳动者不仅仅凭借劳动付出取得工资收入，而且也作为公有资本的所有者分享由劳动者共同创造的以利润形式呈现的资本收入。虽然，这些资本收入并不一定以分红的形式为劳动者所有，但是却给劳动者提供完备的社会保障、丰富的教育资源和卫生医疗资源、不断优化的生活环境，从而能够减少劳动者在这些方面的生活支出，提高生活质量。更重要的是，在公有制企业和公有制经济体中，劳动者可以取得自己创造的价值增值部分，或者说劳动者可以取得超过劳动力价值的以工资形式呈现的收入。即使劳动者暂时的工资收入较低，而积累的部分将为劳动者未来的更大收入提供可能。也就是说，在社会主义市场经济中，公有资本的所有者与劳动力的所有者是统一的，从而克服了利润与工资的对抗性、供给与需求的对抗性矛盾。即使凭借劳动多少而取得的收入存在差距以及供给结构与需求结构的错位，但在政府的计划调节和宏观调控下都保持在适度范围内，从而保障了宏观经济的可持续发展。

In a socialist market economy that includes a private sector of a certain scale, the economic laws of private ownership also play a role to a certain extent. The private sector has a self-reinforcing growth mechanism and will account for an increasingly large proportion of the national economy. Thus, the degree to which the economic laws of private ownership play a role will also increase. Therefore, guiding and regulating the private sector in a socialist market economy is very necessary. At the same time, the development of the private sector should not be restricted; rather, the public sector should be vigorously developed, maintaining the absolute and relative superiority of the public sector over the private sector. Only in this way can the socialist macroeconomy achieve more sustainable, healthier, and faster development than the capitalist macroeconomy.

在存在一定规模私有制经济的社会主义市场经济中，私有制的经济规律也在一定程度上发挥着作用。私有制经济具有自我增长的机制，会在国民经济中占的比例越来越大，这样私有制的经济规律起作用的程度也会越来越大。因此，在社会主义市场经济中对私有制经济的引导和调节是非常必要的。同时，对私有制经济的发展不是限制，而是应该大力发展公有制经济，保持公有制经济对私有制经济的绝对和相对优势，这样才能保持社会主义宏观经济比资本主义宏观经济更可持续、更健康和更快速的发展。

(Author’s biography: Wang Zhongbao, Doctor of Economics, Professor at the School of Marxism, University of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Research Fellow at the Academy of Marxism, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Deputy Director of the Center for Marxist Economic and Social Development Research, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Executive Editor-in-Chief and Director of the Editorial Office of the English-language journal *International Critical Thought*, Executive Editor-in-Chief and Director of the Editorial Office of *World Review of Political Economy*. Concurrently serves as Vice President and Secretary-General of the China Association of Political Economy, Executive Council Member of the Chinese Society of the History of Economic Thought, and Council Member of the Capital Economists Forum.)

（作者简介：王中保，经济学博士，中国社会科学院大学马克思主义学院教授，中国社会科学院马克思主义研究院研究员，中国社会科学院马克思主义经济社会发展研究中心副主任，英文期刊《International Critical Thought （国际思想评论）》执行主编、编辑部主任，《World Review of Political Economy （世界政治经济学评论）》执行主编、编辑部主任。兼任中国政治经济学学会副会长兼秘书长、中华外国经济学说研究会常务理事、首都经济学家论坛理事）

(Fund project: Major Project of the National Social Science Fund of China, “Research on the Political Economy Theoretical Innovation and Historical Experience of China’s Development Path since Reform and Opening Up” [20&ZD052])

（基金项目：国家社会科学基金重大项目“改革开放以来中国发展道路的政治经济学理论创新与历史经验研究”(20&ZD052)）

Online editor: Huihui

网络编辑：慧慧