Canada's middle class forges ahead of US - NY Times

[Keepitsimple]

So much for Justin Trudeau's muddled platform that focuses on Canada's "failure" to help the middle class.

The American middle class, long the most affluent in the world, has lost that distinction.

While the wealthiest Americans are outpacing many of their global peers, a New York Times analysis shows that across the lower- and middle-income tiers, citizens of other advanced countries have received considerably larger raises over the last three decades.

After-tax middle-class incomes in Canada substantially behind in 2000 now appear to be higher than in the United States. The poor in much of Europe earn more than poor Americans.

The numbers, based on surveys conducted over the past 35 years, offer some of the most detailed publicly available comparisons for different income groups in different countries over time. They suggest that most American families are paying a steep price for high and rising income inequality.

Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/23/upshot/the-american-middle-class-is-no-longer-the-worlds-richest.html?_r=1

More Here: https://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/canada-politics/conservatives-liberals-continue-bickering-over-lot-middle-class-194834277.html

[Keepitsimple]

If I'm reading things correctly, we are at or near the top of all countries.

Quite a dilemma for the Liberals now. Behind in the polls and the main plank of their platform in tatters. If Trudeau is kept closeted by his handlers, things won't get better. If they let him speak, it'll be worse. And Mulcair will be pecking away at him. Things are getting interesting.

[WWWTT]

I didn't any of what you are writing from the links you provided.

All I found was opinion with links to more freekin links that had more links attached to that that told me squate nothing!

How about you weave back into your mind boggling maze of links within more links, copy the relevant data, then come back out and copy onto another comment.

Because I'm not clicking onto another link, then have to click onto more links to search for something that backs up what you're claiming.

WWWTT

[Bryan]

I didn't any of what you are writing from the links you provided.

All I found was opinion with links to more freekin links that had more links attached to that that told me squate nothing!

How about you weave back into your mind boggling maze of links within more links, copy the relevant data, then come back out and copy onto another comment.

Because I'm not clicking onto another link, then have to click onto more links to search for something that backs up what you're claiming.

WWWTT

Cite?

[WWWTT]

Cite?

I clicked onto the links provided and only found opinions, no data.

But there is other links provided. Then clicked on a few of those hoping to actually find some data. But guess what? Just more freekin links to click on!

Good luck!

WWWTT

[Shady]

It's really not much of a surprise that having a conservative, pro-jobs, pro-business, pro-energy, competitive tax and regulatory environment prime minister would lead to our middle class overtaking the American middle class. Since they're stuck with an anti-business, anti-energy, high tax, high spend, high regulation president. But if it helps any of you middle class Americans suffering right now. He says he really cares about you! I think food stamps are easier to apply for now, so you've got that.

[WWWTT]

It's really not much of a surprise that having a conservative, pro-jobs, pro-business, pro-energy, competitive tax and regulatory environment prime minister would lead to our middle class overtaking the American middle class. Since they're stuck with an anti-business, anti-energy, high tax, high spend, high regulation president. But if it helps any of you middle class Americans suffering right now. He says he really cares about you! I think food stamps are easier to apply for now, so you've got that.

LOL! Ok Shady if you say so.

If two people are both sinking in quicksand, but the other person is sinking faster than you are, I don't think it's time to start popping the corks on the champagne bottles.

I want to see some actual data. Links to an opinion isn't data.

WWWTT

[Bryan]

The data is in the links in the NYT article, but you already said you don't want to click on them.

[On Guard for Thee]

It's really not much of a surprise that having a conservative, pro-jobs, pro-business, pro-energy, competitive tax and regulatory environment prime minister would lead to our middle class overtaking the American middle class. Since they're stuck with an anti-business, anti-energy, high tax, high spend, high regulation president. But if it helps any of you middle class Americans suffering right now. He says he really cares about you! I think food stamps are easier to apply for now, so you've got that.

Then how come these economic "wonders" took us so much further into debt and have driven our jobless rate above the US?

Edited April 24, 2014 by On Guard for Thee

[waldo]

So much for Justin Trudeau's muddled platform that focuses on Canada's "failure" to help the middle class.

with the study/data emphasis on after-tax medium family income (up to 2010)... just what have your favoured Harper Conservatives done for the 'middle class'?

per StatsCan data, median after-tax family income rose a measly 17% over 30 years (1980-to-2010):

- 1980 => $59,600

- 2010 => $69,860

Simple, I'll let you run the numbers from 2006 to 2010... really show us the "impact" Harper Conservatives have had on median after-tax family income.

on edit: in line with the study reference to a 2010 end point, adjusted StatsCan data (from 2011 to 2010)... percentage calc rises from 14 to 17 percent over the 30 year period

Edited April 24, 2014 by waldo

[Bryan]

There's a reason dishonest people pick 1980: it's the only time you can cherry pick where it makes the current success appear to be less impressive than it really is -- even then, you have to be deliberately lying to make it look that way.

How to square this with opposition claims that “the middle class hasn’t had a pay raise in 30 years”? Surely there must be some truth in there? Yes, there is. The key phrase is “in 30 years.” Median after-tax incomes are indeed only slightly higher now, after inflation, than they were in 1980; market incomes, before taxes and transfers, are actually several percentage points lower. But that broad thirty-odd-year comparison hides two distinct periods, with distinctly different trends. In the first, lasting until the mid-to-late 1990s, incomes fell sharply, then bottomed out. But since then they have been growing steadily; even the last recession only slightly dented this trend. The “struggling middle class” describes a period that ended nearly two decades ago.

In fact, pick any time frame except 30 years — 10, 20, 40, 50 — and the trend is up. The only one that produces relative stagnation is the one beginning in 1980. Why is that? Because it happens to start with the two worst recessions since World War II, in the early ’80s and early ’90s, periods of high and lasting unemployment.

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2014/04/23/andrew-coyne-it-might-not-actually-be-the-richest-middle-class-on-the-planet-but-canada-certainly-isnt-struggling/

[waldo]

There's a reason dishonest people pick 1980: it's the only time you can cherry pick where it makes the current success appear to be less impressive than it really is -- even then, you have to be deliberately lying to make it look that way.

nice try! Just how do you equate a stated 14%-over-30year rise in the median family income to your linked article's reference to "claims that “the middle class hasn’t had a pay raise in 30 years"? Referencing the StatCan1980 date/data aligns with the first "common year for the study's harmonized data sets (1980, 1985, 1990, 1995, 2000, 2004, 2007 and 2010)"

as I said to Simple, please showcase exactly what your favoured Harper Conservatives have done for Canadian's median after-tax family income level... since you've troubled yourself to claim dishonesty/lying, I trust you will endevour be on your most accurate footing. Yes?

[On Guard for Thee]

Nothing dishonest about it. The figures don't lie.

[Bryan]

Nothing dishonest about it. The figures don't lie.

They absolutely DO lie, and the link I provided showed why.

pick any time frame except 30 years — 10, 20, 40, 50 — and the trend is up. The only one that produces relative stagnation is the one beginning in 1980.

[waldo]

They absolutely DO lie, and the link I provided showed why.

there was most certainly no, as you stated, "dishonesty or lying" on my part. I said nothing about "no raise"... I initially stated the actual raise and re-emphasized it in my first response to your claimed "dishonesty and lying". I also tied the StatsCan 1980 reference date to the study... again, to it's first "common year harmonized data set".

let me put it to you again... the challenge you're clearly ignoring: "please showcase exactly what your favoured Harper Conservatives have done for Canadian's median after-tax family income level"

[cybercoma]

They absolutely DO lie, and the link I provided showed why.

So show us what Harper's government did. Present and interpret the figures for 2006-2013.

[cybercoma]

This is an article from roughly 10 months ago on a report from Finance Canada that stated, "the income of Canadian middle-class families did not grow as fast as other income groups over the last 35 years, with male workers in middle-class families having seen “little wage increases” since the mid-1990s."

Edited April 24, 2014 by cybercoma

[Michael Hardner]

It seems to be the case that:

Canada's middle class is doing better than the middle class in other countries

Canada's middle class isn't doing as well as other income groups

These aren't contradictory facts.

[cybercoma]

It seems to be the case that:

Canada's middle class is doing better than the middle class in other countries

Canada's middle class isn't doing as well as other income groups

These aren't contradictory facts.

The point is that some posters here are spinning this as though Harper has done great things for Canada's middle class, whilst not bothering to show what he has done for them. The fact of the matter is that their incomes are stagnate. He has done nothing for them.

[WWWTT]

Here's what I found from those providing the data, comment:

LIS contains two databases, one focused on income, and one focused on wealth.

The Luxembourg Income Study Database (LIS) is the largest available database of harmonised income microdata collected from multiple countries over a period of decades. The LIS datasets contain variables on market income, public transfers and taxes, household- and person-level characteristics, labor market outcomes, and, in some datasets, expenditures.

The Luxembourg Wealth Study Database (LWS) is the first cross-national database of harmonised wealth microdata in existence. The LWS datasets include variables on assets and debt, market and government income, household characteristics, labor market outcomes and, in some datasets, expenditures and/or behavioural indicators.

Nothing here about the cost of living, so take the data for what it is!

WWWTT

[Michael Hardner]

The point is that some posters here are spinning this as though Harper has done great things for Canada's middle class, whilst not bothering to show what he has done for them. The fact of the matter is that their incomes are stagnate. He has done nothing for them.

Well, it's really a question of absolute vs relative statistics.

[guyser]

let me put it to you again... the challenge you're clearly ignoring: "please showcase exactly what your favoured Harper Conservatives have done for Canadian's median after-tax family income level"

Susquatch will appear long before any info from the guy thats called people liars all day will show any..

[waldo]

Well, it's really a question of absolute vs relative statistics.

uhhh... you mean this referenced study intended to draw and provide relative country-to-country comparisons?

[waldo]

Susquatch will appear long before any info from the guy thats called people liars all day will show any..

relatively speaking, absolutely!

[Michael Hardner]

uhhh... you mean this referenced study intended to draw and provide relative country-to-country comparisons?

Right - this means that Harper has been relatively less mean than other countries I guess.