Hello everyone, I am the dust of history, and I have recently discovered a strange thing, so please follow my footsteps to see what happened, and I am very angry after knowing the truth.
Recently, local fiscal constraints have become a hot topic, especially with the introduction of counter-cyclical adjustment measures in some cities, the plight of local finances has gradually surfaced. Behind this, the decrease in land transfer income and the increase in salary expenditure in the system have become important reasons for the unsustainability of some local finances. It can be said that the current predicament of local finances comes not only from the "depletion" of fiscal revenue, but also from the "bottomless pit" of fiscal expenditure.
In this context, some local governments have begun to show "tight spell" financial pressure, and some public officials have also become the focus of public opinion because of the issue of remuneration. They are calling for wage increases, which in turn means more fiscal spending. How do you view the issue of remuneration for public officials? How should local finances be "relieved"? What are the in-depth considerations in this? This article will discuss these aspects and take you to understand the current "dilemma" of local finance.
XiaobianI come from the countryside and know very well the difficulties of farmers, but why is it that the demands of public officials are always met by local governments? Next, follow the footsteps of the dust to further understand.
1. Why do local finances "make ends meet"?
# 1. The "shrinkage" of income from land sales
Land finance has always been an "important blue chip" of local finance, and land transfer income is an indispensable part of local fiscal revenue. However, under the influence of macro-control policies and the continuous force of property market regulation, the land market has "cooled down" significantly in recent times, and the land transfer income in some cities has also "shrunk" to varying degrees.
Data shows that in the first half of this year, the country's land sales revenue fell by 26.4% year-on-year, and in some hotspot cities, this figure even fell by nearly 50%. Under such circumstances, the "money bags" of local governments have naturally been affected to a certain extent, and the "gap" in fiscal revenue has become more and more obvious.
# 2. The "skyrocket" in salary spending within the system
At the same time, the pressure on local governments to spend money is increasing. Especially in some grassroots areas, with the development of various livelihood work and the increasing work intensity of front-line civil servants, higher requirements have been put forward for the improvement of salary and benefits.
However, the current situation is that the salary level in the system is relatively low, and there is a certain "decoupling" phenomenon from the local economic development level and price level. This also means that in order to retain talent, local governments will need to "compensate" in other ways, which will undoubtedly become an "important component" of fiscal spending.
It can be said that to a large extent, the "income beyond expenditure" of local finances is inseparable from the decrease in income from land sales and the increase in salary expenditure within the system. This also poses a new challenge to the financial work of local governments.
2. How should the issue of remuneration of public officials be viewed?
Recently, some local governments have begun to find themselves in the dilemma of "making ends meet", and the issue of public employees' salaries has also become the focus of public opinion. In the financial reports of some local governments, it is not difficult to find that salary expenditure within the system has accounted for a considerable proportion, and has even become a "major item" of fiscal expenditure.
Against this backdrop, some public officials have begun to call for wage increases, arguing that the current level of pay is no longer commensurate with the level of local economic development and the amount of work they do. Some local governments have also responded to this call, saying that they will make appropriate adjustments to the remuneration packages of public officials.
# 1. There is a real problem with the level of compensation
It is true that there are certain problems with the level of remuneration within the system compared to the current price level, as well as the intensity and pressure of the work of public officials. In some grassroots areas, the salaries of front-line civil servants have not even reached the local "subsistence standard", which will undoubtedly affect their work enthusiasm and quality.
Moreover, in the current salary distribution mechanism, there are still certain deficiencies in the performance appraisal and incentive mechanism, which has also led to the phenomenon of "neglect" of some public employees. Under such circumstances, appropriately raising the salary level of public employees can also be understood as an "incentive", which can better mobilize their enthusiasm for work, enhance their sense of service, and contribute to the development of the local cause.
# 2. But it also needs to "do what you can"
Of course, we also need to have an objective and comprehensive understanding of the issue of remuneration for public officials. At present, there are indeed certain difficulties in local finances, and the salary expenditure of public officials is often a "trap" of fiscal expenditure that cannot be "escaped".
If we blindly and blindly raise the salary level of public officials, it will undoubtedly bring greater pressure on local finances and will also aggravate the contradiction between fiscal revenue and expenditure. Moreover, such an approach cannot fundamentally solve the problem of the salary system within the system, nor can it form a long-term incentive mechanism.
Therefore, when solving the issue of public employees' salaries, local governments need to "take into account the overall situation" and "do what they can". The remuneration and benefits of public employees can be appropriately adjusted, but such adjustments should be made "according to local conditions," and full consideration should be given to the level of local economic development, the level of fiscal revenue, and the fairness and rationality of salary distribution.
3. How should local finances "break the siege"?
# 1. Diversify the path of fiscal revenue
At present, local finances are indeed facing certain difficulties, but it is precisely in the midst of such difficulties that we can find the way forward. As for the policy of "unraveling" local finance, the path of diversifying fiscal revenue is undoubtedly an important part of it.
It can be said that the current predicament of local finance is also "sending a signal" to us, that the fiscal revenue structure of local governments is too simple, too dependent on land transfer income, this path has been unsustainable, and it is also vulnerable to the impact of external macroeconomic regulation and control policies.
Therefore, local governments need to actively explore diversified sources of fiscal revenue, and can increase their fiscal "bargaining chips" and achieve sustainable growth of fiscal revenue by broadening the tax field, optimizing the tax structure, promoting employment and entrepreneurship, and developing characteristic industries.
# 2. Rational control of fiscal expenditures
In addition, in the process of "unraveling", local governments also need to consciously strengthen fiscal supervision, reasonably control the growth rate of fiscal expenditure, avoid the "excessive expansion" of fiscal expenditure, and also strengthen performance evaluation, optimize the structure of fiscal expenditure, and ensure that every fiscal expenditure can be "spent on the cutting edge", can truly benefit people's livelihood, and promote sustainable economic and social development.
# 3. Promote the reform of institutional mechanisms
At the same time, in the current context, it is also necessary to further promote the reform of the system and mechanism, especially in the salary system and incentive mechanism, to form a scientific and reasonable salary distribution mechanism, incentive mechanism, so that the majority of public officials have more sense of gain, happiness, but also to make the fiscal expenditure more inclined to the grassroots frontline, for the grassroots development and people's livelihood to provide strong support.
Only through such efforts can local finances truly "break the siege" and achieve the goal of high-quality and sustainable development.
epilogue
The "struggling to make ends meet" in local finances is not only an economic issue, but also a development issue and an issue of institutional mechanisms. In the current context, we need to have a sense of the overall situation, but also need to have a spirit of responsibility, pay attention to the plight of local finance, and jointly "make suggestions" for it.
It is hoped that through the joint efforts of all parties, more "breakthrough" strategies can be found, and it can also provide useful reference for the sustainable development of local finance, the reform of the remuneration of public officials, and the modernization of the national governance system and governance capacity.
Seeing this, Dust believes that everyone has understood what happened, do you have anything to say about this?