>X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 20:38:09 -0400
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From: Bob Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Falling Behind: The State of Working Canada 2000
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>
>
>
>     Undergraduate tuition fees rose by 126%
>
>
>     The private share of all health care spending
>     rose from 24% to 30%.
>
>
>     Private health care spending per person rose by
>     19.6% to $733, while public health care spending
>     per person fell by 5.1% to $1680 between 1990 and
>     1998.
>
>
>
>
>   From.......
>
>  "Falling Behind: The State of Working Canada 2000" by Ed Finn
>
>Long-Term Trends
>
>   * Real GDP per person in Canada - which is divided between households,
>     businesses and governments - grew by an average of just 1.05% per year
>     in the 1990s, down from an annual average increase of 1.9% in the
>     1980s, 2.2% in the 1970s, and 3.7% in the 1960s.
>
>   * Real personal disposable (after tax) income per person fell by an
>     average of 0.33% per year in the 1990s, down from an annual average
>     increase of 1.1% in the 1980s, 3.0% in the 1970s, and 3.9% in the
>     1960s. Thus, in 1999, real personal disposable income per Canadian was
>     3.3% lower than in 1989.
>
>   * There has been no increase for more than 20 years in the real annual
>     earnings of Canadian men working on a full-time, full year basis. In
>     1997, such men earned an average $42,626, compared to $42,635 in 1975
>     (expressed in constant 1997 dollars.)
>
>   * Between 1981 and 1995, only the top 10% of male earners experienced
>     any increase at all in their real annual earnings (up 6.2% over the
>     entire period). The real annual earnings of the bottom 90% of men
>     fell, and they fell the most for lower earners, with the real annual
>     earnings of the bottom 10% of men falling by 31.7%. This fall was the
>     result of declining real weekly wages, and a major reduction in the
>     number of weeks worked in the year by lower paid workers.
>
>   * The annual pay gap between men and women working full-time on a full-
>     year basis narrowed between 1975 and 1997, with the average earnings
>     of such women rising from 60% to 72% of those of comparable men.
>     However, the real annual earnings of such women rose by just 12.8% in
>     the entire period from 1980 to 1997, despite some increase in weekly
>     hours worked, and only half of all women in the labour force work on a
>     full-time, full year basis.
>
>   * The average annual national unemployment rate has increased from 5.0%
>     in the 1960s, to 6.7% in the 1970s, to 9.3% in the 1980s, to 9.6% in
>     the 1990s. The average length of a spell of unemployment has increased
>     from 14 weeks in 1976, to 18 weeks in 1989, to more than 20 weeks in
>     the 1990s. On a brighter note, by the end of 1999 the national
>     unemployment rate had finally fallen below 7%.
>
>   * Between 1983 and 1992, the median real annual earnings of young women
>     workers aged 20 to 24 fell by 24%, and those of young men by 22%.
>
>   * Between 1980 and 1996, because of flat or falling wages and rising
>     unemployment, lower income families came to rely more on transfer
>     payments from governments (UI, social assistance, public pensions
>     etc.) Transfer payments made up 59% of the income of the lowest income
>     20% of Canadian families in 1996, up from 46% in 1980; and 25% of the
>     income of the next 20% of families in 1996, compared to 14% in 1980.
>
>   * Transfer payments make a huge difference to income inequality. In
>     1997, the most affluent 20% of Canadian families had 21 times the
>     income of bottom 20% when only pre tax "market" income (wages,
>     salaries and investment income) is considered, but just 5 times as
>     much income after taxes and transfers had redistributed income.
>
>   * The overall poverty (low income) rate in Canada rose from 16.0% in
>     1980 to 17.5% in 1997. However, this was the combined result of
>     declining rates of poverty among the elderly (down from 34% to 19%)
>     because of improvements to public pensions, and of increasing poverty
>     rates for younger families with heads aged 25 to 34 (up from 12% to
>     19%.) As a result, the child poverty rate also rose, from 16% to 20%.
>     Child poverty rates have remained stubbornly high even during the
>     1990s recovery because of deep cuts to social assistance and UI
>     benefits.
>
>Trends in the 1990s
>
>   * Job growth in the 1990s was, until very late in the decade, heavily
>     tilted towards "precarious" jobs. Between 1989 and 1998, the total
>     number of self-employed workers grew by 40%, part-time paid jobs grew
>     by 16%, and full-time, paid jobs grew by just 2%. 70% of the increase
>     in self- employment was in "own account" businesses with no employees.
>     On average, in 1996, these "own account" jobs paid men $27,200 per
>     year, and women just $14,800 per year. Fortunately, strong growth of
>     full-time, paid jobs resumed at the end of the decade.
>
>   * Over the entire period from 1989 to 1998, average weekly earnings
>     adjusted for inflation increased by 2.8%, while real output per hour
>     worked rose by 9.4%. Despite strong economic growth, real average
>     weekly earnings did not increase in 1999.
>
>   * Between 1989 and 1997, the average "market" income of Canadian
>     families from wages, salaries, self-employment earnings and
>     investments (adjusted for inflation) fell from $53,937 to $50,672, and
>     average family income after taxes and government transfers fell by
>     5.6% from $48,311 to $45,605. Poorer families experienced the most
>     serious decline in both market and after tax/transfer incomes. The
>     real after tax/transfer incomes of the least well-off 40% of families
>     with children fell by 12% over this period.
>
>   * Between 1990 and 1998, private health care spending per person rose by
>     19.6% to $733, while public health care spending per person fell by
>     5.1% to $1680. As a result, the private share of all health care
>     spending rose from 24% to 30%. Over the same period, undergraduate
>     tuition fees rose by 126%
>
>
>http://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/fallingbehindsum.html
>
>see also....
>
>http://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/fallingbehindch1.html
>
>
>
>   .............................................
>   Bob Olsen, Toronto      [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>   .............................................
>




Reply via email to