Main menu:

History of RPE Thought

Posts by Tag

RSS New from the CCPA

  • Mobility pricing must be fair and equitable for all April 12, 2018
    As Metro Vancouver’s population has grown, so have its traffic congestion problems. Whether it’s a long wait to cross a bridge or get on a bus, everyone can relate to the additional time and stress caused by a transportation system under strain. Mobility pricing is seen as a solution to Metro Vancouver’s transportation challenges with […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • Budget 2018: The Most Disappointing Budget Ever March 14, 2018
    Premier Pallister’s Trump-esque statement that budget 2018 was going to be the “best budget ever” has fallen a bit flat. Instead of a bold plan to deal with climate change, poverty and our crumbling infrastructure, we are presented with two alarmist scenarios to justify further tax cuts and a lack of decisive action: the recent […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • 2018 Federal Budget Analysis February 14, 2018
    Watch this space for response and analysis of the federal budget from CCPA staff and our Alternative Federal Budget partners. More information will be added as it is available. Commentary and Analysis Some baby steps for dad and big steps forward for women, by Kate McInturff (CCPA) An ambition constrained budget, by David Macdonald (CCPA) Five things […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • CED in Manitoba - The Video January 29, 2018
    Community Economic Development in Manitoba - nudging capitalism out of the way?
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • With regional management BC’s iconic forest industry can benefit British Columbians rather than multinational corporations January 17, 2018
    Forests are one of the iconic symbols of British Columbia, and successive governments and companies operating here have largely focussed on the cheap, commodity lumber business that benefits industry. Former provincial forestry minister Bob Williams, who has been involved with the industry for five decades, proposes regional management of this valuable natural resource to benefit […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
Progressive Bloggers

Meta

Recent Blog Posts

Posts by Author

Recent Blog Comments

The Progressive Economics Forum

How to Lower Poverty Without Really Trying

Followers of statistical entrails have known for some time that the incidence of poverty (sorry, low income)  varies between surveys. The Census – which covers 20% of the population – captures significantly more low income persons  than does the annual Survey of Labour and Income Dynamics which is based on a much smaller sample which is followed for a period of time. The measure of low income is the same – the LICO (after tax.)

Here are the numbers for 2005. They suggest that the replacement of the long form Census with a National Household Survey will lead to a significant reduction in measured low income.

Low Income (After Tax) in 2005 (%)
Census SLID
All 11.4 10.8
Children 13.1 11.7
Seniors 6.7 6.1
Enjoy and share:

Comments

Comment from Arthur Smitherman
Time: February 11, 2011, 7:39 pm

I think knocking on the doors on the highrises of two of the poorest postal codes in Canada is better way to determine income, in my opinion and experience. Firstly, for

Comment from Arthur Smitherman
Time: February 11, 2011, 7:52 pm

I think that knocking on the doors of all the highrises in two of the poorest postal codes in Canada is a far better way to determine poverty in my opinion, and experience. Certianly “moving the goal posts” to measure poverty is a nasty trick; but to see it first had is another matter. Many able bodied and willing people are housebound because they can’t get day care, some leave their young children at home and work anyway. It would surprise many to know how many men are housebound and alone looking after young children, because their young immigrant wife didn’t like it here and moved back home to a “better life”. The fact is poverty costs us all, and training and eduction doesen’t. For every $1M we invest in training the poor and minorities we get $2.8M back and half of that goes right back into the local economy. Now, how are the unemployment statistics manipulated again?

Write a comment





Related articles