China's social Management index G20 the end of the country

China's social management index was 0 in 2008, the Cass report estimates. This means that China's social management system in three aspects of public pension expenditure, civil rights protection, and public access to information is extremely imperfect, "Caixin net" (reporter Lanfang 26th from Beijing) The China Urban Competitiveness Report released by the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences on April 26, 2008, The gap between China's national competitiveness and developed countries has narrowed, ranking nineth in G20 countries.　　But at the same time of economic development, the social Management index which represents the relationship between citizen and government is the lowest in the list. The above report, by the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences Institute of Finance and Trade research led by Dr. Pengfei, the full name of the "2010 China's Urban Competitiveness Blue Book: China's Urban Competitiveness Report" (hereinafter referred to as the report), selected G20 country as a sample, from the main quality, domestic supply, domestic demand　　The index system of evaluating national competitiveness is set up in six aspects of global connection and public system.　　The report shows that in terms of national competitiveness, the traditional developed countries remain in the forefront, the top ten countries are the United States, the European Union, Japan, Australia, Canada, Germany, the United Kingdom, France, China and South Korea.　　Unlike overall competitiveness, the report states that social management reflects the relationship between the Government and the people, which is embodied in the national tax and the Government to provide public services for the citizens, under the conditions of reasonable tax burden to provide more and higher quality of public services, but also a country's competitive performance is one of the important manifestations. According to the report, China's social management index was 0 in 2008.　　This means that China's performance in public pension expenditure, civil rights protection and public access to information is not satisfactory, and the social management system is very imperfect. The report pointed out: "China has long been mainly focused on economic construction, and relatively neglect of social development, leading to economic and social development is not coordinated, the supply of public services is seriously inadequate, which has become a constraint on China's national competitiveness of the important factor." At the same time, China ranked 13th in the G20 countries in the social system indicators.　　The indicators of social system mainly reflect the relations among the people, the fairness of wealth distribution and the fairness of opportunity acquisition. The report shows that in the BRIC countries, China's wealth distribution is only inferior to Brazil, and India and Russia have better distribution of wealth than China. The highest percentage of national income for the poorest 20% people in 2008 was Japan, which reached 10.6%, while China was only 4.3% and ranked fourth in G20.　　The report points out that deepening the reform of income distribution system and establishing a fair and equitable wealth distribution mechanism has become an urgent problem to be solved in building a harmonious society in China. In addition, the report noted that China's public system competitiveness ranked 14th in 2008.