Why should a person be designated as an agricultural hukou?

The identity of the household registration system is limited to framing people in a geographical relationship, which is very unfair. Why should a person be classified as an agricultural hukou based on his "occupation"? But as long as you look at today's "farmers", you will find that most of them are no longer farming, and most of their income no longer comes from agriculture, but they still do not call others farmers, and there is no such truth in the world.

Occupation is only a division of labor, if farming is naturally farmers, but if you are already building machines for industry for export every day, but still call them farmers, and then say that what happens in the city has nothing to do with them, how can you do it? It doesn't make sense.

The rule of law is to act in accordance with the law, and all are equal before the law. This unreasonable thing drags around and should have been changed a long time ago. I think it is a good thing to make a decision to change this time, and it is a great liberation for the peasants.

One of the obstacles to reform is concept, and the other is, of course, some objective and practical problems. The most important thing is whether there is any way to solve these problems. Sometimes we put too much emphasis on practical difficulties and then find excuses to "stay still". That belongs to inaction in reform and a tendency to be prevented in administration. In fact, practical difficulties can be solved, but why can't they be solved?

Of course, there is a set of benefits for urban hukou, which was formed by the past system. Over the years, we have carried out urban and rural co-ordination, and there have been many reforms, including the equalization of public services.

In the past, it was true that the government did not take care of many things in rural areas, but now there are no fewer items on the left and right, such as compulsory education, NCMS, old-age pension, and low income, but on the whole, the level of security in rural areas is indeed a little lower. Does it mean that farmers will never cross that threshold in terms of identity? I saw the local reform in Chengdu, which was enlightening-he said there were differences, but there was no identity gap.

What does it mean exactly? For example, farmers' houses and land have become market-oriented, their income has increased, and if they pay a little more money, they can raise their social security to a higher level; just like us, if they pay a little more money, they will be able to upgrade to a higher level. In the past, this could not be the case. in the past, if he were a citizen with rural household registration, his various welfare and security could not be raised to the city and could be regarded as two worlds, but now we have to break down the barriers between the two worlds.

The central government, local governments, enterprises and families should each bear their own responsibilities.

Of course, it is not enough to allow both urban and rural residents to reach the same level of welfare in a short period of time, because there is a rigidity in it: it is a joke if we want to hold down the higher level that we have already reached, but we have to raise all people to the same level. it cannot be done financially, nor can it be done in terms of financing.

A better way is to first eliminate the "death threshold" between urban and rural areas and turn it into different levels of security, and then add one piece when there are conditions, and then add a little bit more to it, and then flatten it out over time. Here, the central finance, local finance and social enterprises bear part of the responsibility, including the families themselves, and we can only do so.

To narrow the gap, we must admit the gap, but do not turn the gap into a threshold of identity; some people can't hand it in even if they have money, why? Just because they are farmers, can farmers only enter rural social security? You still have to get through, say, level 15, level 14, level 13, level 12, and then combine it with your past history.

Many experts on security issues are also studying the reform. they have a lot of good opinions and attempts have been made in many places, which can only be carried out on this basis. As for the central finance, we should also consider how we can do more in this respect and better bear the universal obligations to the whole people.

For example, studying. Why do we have to say that the money for a child's education is given by a provincial government? Since compulsory education is passed by national laws and is a right that citizens of the people's Republic of China should enjoy, it should be financially funded no matter where they go to study.