The extent of economic inequality – including what drives it and what to do about it – is hotly debated amongst policy makers, economists and political leaders.
What isn’t debated is its effects on certain segments of society: from health outcomes of individuals and entire communities to social cohesion, economic growth and social mobility.
So how bad is it and who does it affect? Here are five things we know about economic inequality in Canada:
1. Economic inequality is a matter of life and death.
According to a report this month from the Canadian Institute for Health Information, the gap between the health of high and low-income Canadians has widened over the past decade for measures such as smoking, hospitalization for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and how Canadians rate their own mental health.
A Statistics Canada report has also found that economic inequality, including income inequality, is associated with the premature death of 40,000 Canadians a year, which is equal to 110 Canadians dying prematurely every day.
Comparing the wealthiest 20 per cent of Canadians with the poorest 20 per cent of Canadians, it was found that a man living on a low income has a 67 per cent greater chance of dying each year than his wealthy counterpart, and a woman living on a low income, a 52 per cent greater chance.
2. Income inequality has grown over the past 20 years in Canada.
According to the Gini coefficient (a measurement of the statistical distribution of income between residents across the country), Canada successfully reduced income inequality in the 1980s. However, according to the same measurement, income inequality rose in the mid-1990s and has remained at an all-time high.
To put this into perspective, Canada ranks 12th highest among developed countries for the worst income inequality and received a “C” grade on income equality from the OECD.
3. Studies suggest that economic inequality is driven by the rising concentration of wealth at the top.
In 2012, the top 10 per cent of Canadians accounted for almost half of all wealth while the bottom 30 per cent of Canadians accounted for less than one per cent of all wealth.
In fact, the bottom 50 per cent of Canadians combined controlled less than six per cent of all wealth in Canada.
Maybe the simplest way to understand all this is this single statistic: the top 10 per cent of Canadians held almost $6 of every $10 of financial assets in the country, excluding pensions.
4. The roots of economic inequality are often social.
Economists frequently make a distinction between inequality due to differences in effort and talent, and those due to differences in circumstances that are seen as beyond an individual’s control, such as gender, race, class, ethnicity, sexuality, geography, age, ability, immigration status and religion.
Economists often believe that inequality arises from differences in opportunities combined with talent and effort. But the International Monetary Fund (IMF) has found that economic inequality is more strongly associated with inequality of opportunities than with talent and effort – refuting the strongly held belief that wealth is tied to hard work.
Other data also suggest the belief that effort equals wealth is misguided. Indigenous people earn only 70 cents for every dollar versus non-Indigenous peoples; and women make 67 per cent of what men make. These income gaps partly stem from disparities in the distribution of good paying and more secure jobs.
5. Income inequality slows the overall economic growth of the country.
Benefits do not trickle down. The IMF and the OECD have found that an inverse relationship exists between increasing the income share of those living in the highest income group and overall economic growth of the country. If the income share of the top 20 per cent of income recipients increases by one per cent, GDP growth actually slows.
However, a similar increase in the income share of the bottom 20 per cent – a country’s poorest – is associated with a rise in economic growth. This positive relationship continues when increasing the income share of the middle class, resulting in higher economic growth.
Carolyn Shimmin is a Knowledge Translation Coordinator with the George and Fay Yee Centre for Healthcare Innovation.
Carolyn is a Troy Media Thought Leader. Why aren’t you?
The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.
Inequality is worse than we have been told – in all countries – it never gets better.
Think about it – the gap between the rich and poor always gets wider. The poorest hardly get any raise and are still in poverty – those of us above get little more – whilst rich fat-cats increase their incomes by up to 30 per cent, compoundeded year on year into a massive annual fortune. Incomes never converge to improve inequality – governments think us all idiots.
The con is to hide the ever widening income inequality between a countries powerful rich families and the rest of the population.
I live in the UK and contacted the Office for National Statistics (ONS). They help the scam using a statistical confidence trick called the Gini coefficient. My findings prove this beyond any doubt. Needless to say, they were most evasive.
If the government measured weight problems by ignoring the obese and dangerously underweight – you would say they were corrupt and trying to hide the problems – wouldn’t you? That is how they measure inequality – ignore the richest and poorest groups – those millions of people most affected by what is being measured. For political motive.
Indeed, the UK Statistics Authority (Deputy Head of Regulation) actually admitted to me about the Gini, “I agree with your observation that it is not ideal if your particular interest is in inequalities at the top or bottom of the spectrum”. The first time perhaps they disclosed the fact they know it is “not ideal” for showing the inequalities of the rich or poor.
Please visit my website at skilful.com.