In 1982, our country began to implement the policy of "contract production to households", and the first round of land contracts lasted for 15 years. In 1997, another redivision of the land, known as the second round of land contracting, was given for a period of 30 years, expiring in 2027. During this period, the land contract relationship remained basically unchanged
From 1997 to the present, almost no new births have experienced the allocation of land, and the elderly who died or are still alive after 1997 still have arable land.
The status quo of rural land
For example, some rural families have only one or two people left, but they hold more than a dozen acres of land in their hands. However, some families are thriving, reaching dozens of people, but the whole family only has three or five acres of land. Therefore, after the expiration of the second round of rural land contracts, it has become the focus of widespread concern and heated discussions among farmers, hoping that there will be changes or the status quo will be maintained.
Rural land disruption redistribution? Or do you want to keep it as it is? Opinions differ
Some people believe that, according to common sense, it may be fairer and more reasonable to disrupt the reclassification, and adjust according to demographic changes.
Some people believe that, judging from the current situation, there are many troubles and contradictions in disrupting and redividing.
At present, according to the signal released by the state in advance, after the expiration of the second round of land contracts, the possibility of rural land disruption and redistribution is almost zero!
The peasants all said that the distribution of land in 1997 was very fair. If the reclassification is disrupted in 2027, it will be difficult to grasp fairness, and the older generation of farmers will be very dependent on land. On the other hand, young people today are almost never dependent on the land for a living, and they are even more reluctant to stay in the countryside to farm. Therefore, disrupting the redistribution may only make the land idle, barren and unplanted.
Judging from the "three rural" policies in recent years, whether it is the confirmation of land rights or the extension of land contracts for another 30 years, all kinds of signs show that the state is to promote land reform, to keep up with large-scale, intensive, and modern agriculture, and to transform traditional agriculture into a new type of agriculture.
Rural people generally experience these two phenomena:
In the first and second rounds of land contracting, the grandparents are allocated the land, and the grandparents die or the grandparents are alive, and the contracted land is cultivated by the children.
2. Those born after 1997 will hardly receive land during the 30-year period of the land contract. This is also the status quo of "increasing the number of people without increasing the land, and reducing the number of people without reducing the land" in the rural areas.
"The dead have land, the living have no land", these two phenomena have been discussed and hotly discussed by people, some people say fair, some people say it is unfair, and everyone has different opinions!
Judging from our country's current land contract policy, after the second round of land contracts expires in 30 years, there is generally no disruption to the redistribution, that is, rural people born after 2027 will still not be allocated land. As a result, a cycle of "increasing people without increasing land, and reducing people without reducing land" has been created. For the elderly in rural areas who have died, the land is inherited by their children. Newly born and newly added rural households do not add land.
At present, after the expiration of the second round of land contracts, there will be no disruption. Therefore, the newly born population in rural areas will not be allocated land. After the expiration of the second round of land contracts, our country's land policy is planned to continue for another 30 years.
Is it reasonable to increase the number of people without increasing the land, reducing the number of people without reducing the land, and not disrupting the redistribution? There is a reversal
The overall policy will not change, and the land in the hands of the peasants will remain as it is and will not disrupt the elements. Of course, many rural areas have "reserved" mobile land, and the newly-born rural population can apply for rural mobile land or newly cleared land, so as to give the newly-born rural population a share of land.
Some families in rural areas "die out" for various reasons! That is, the whole family does not exist, and the land of such a family can be recovered by the village collective and redistributed to the landless rural population.
If there is a phenomenon of mobile land and "the death of the whole household" in the village, the probability that the new rural population will be allocated land will increase. Of course, in some villages, mobile land has been allocated, no mobile land is available, and there are no conditions for new reclamation of wasteland, and there is no situation of "the whole household disappearing" in the whole village! Then, after the expiration of the second round of land contracts, it may be difficult for the newly born rural population to get land.
As rural people, if they have no land to cultivate, no land to plant, and no land to allocate, they cannot guarantee the normal life of peasants in the rural areas. Of course, according to the current situation of some landless peasants, the state may come up with subsidy funds and policy benefits, and the local government will try to find ways to give economic subsidies and support to landless peasants according to local conditions and according to individual differences.