No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
A Note on the Distribution of Earnings in the USSR Under Brezhnev
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 January 2017
Extract
A characteristic feature of the 1970s is also the increase in the differentiation of wages as one of the means of strengthening the principle of material incentives.
Problemy Raspredeleniia I Rost Narodnogo Blagosostoianiia- Type
- Notes and Comment
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Association for Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies. 1980
References
1. For example, Jerry Hough gives the impression that the post-Stalin reduction of the inequality of the earnings of workers and employees continued into the mid-1970s (see Jerry F., Hough, “The Man and the System,” Problems of Communism, 25 [March-April 1976], p. 12 Google Scholar). This has been quoted by popular writers. Albert Szymanski, for example, argues in his recent book that the trend toward earnings equalization has continued since the 1940s (see Albert Szymanski, Is the red flag flying ? [London, 1979], pp. 60-61). He bases his study partly on Hough. Only data up to 1970 are considered in Alastair McAuley's valuable monograph, Economic Welfare in the Soviet Union (Madison, Wise, 1979).
2. A. S. Rzhanitsyna anticipated that inequalities of earnings would diminish during 1976-80 (see Rzhanitsyna, A. S., Problemy raspredeleniia i rost narodnogo blagosostoianiia [Moscow, 1979], p. 123 Google Scholar). The reasons for this were the increase in the minimum wage to seventy rubles per month (which took place during 1976-77), the improvement of the relative position of workers in the traditionally low-paid service sectors, and the improvement in the relative incomes of collective farmers.
3. The “primary income distribution” is the distribution of gross earnings and property income. The “secondary income distribution” is the primary income distribution corrected for taxes and transfer payments. The “tertiary income distribution” is the secondary income distribution corrected for income in kind from the state (for example, subsidized housing and free medical care). McAuley distinguishes between “earnings” and “income.” His Al, A2, A4, B2, and B3 correspond to the primary income distribution, the same (less taxes and plus A3) correspond to the secondary income distribution, and the latter (plus C2 [including housing]) corresponds to the tertiary income distribution (see McAuley, Economic Welfare, P. 10).
4. See Potrebnosti, dokhody, potreblenie (Moscow, 1979), p. 106.