Canadian Income Inequality and Its Impact Sarah Pitre - 100 511 731 University of Ontario Institute of Technology Canada has always taken great pride in its health care system. Publicly funded, Medicare has helped many, but has also aided in masking one of this country’s largest growing problems. Income inequality is highly prevalent throughout Canada, affecting the health of its citizens, and over-burdening its health care system. The growing gap between incomes is largely in part to the economic neoliberalism taking place within Canada. The stress placed on lower and middle income families through various social determents of health is taking its toll on society and its individuals. The oppressed state of undermined …show more content…
This income inequality started with Canada’s most recent recession, but as we left this recession income inequality continued to rise. The Gini coefficient is the most widely used measure of inequality, comparing the dispersion of income throughout a nations citizens. Over the past few years the Canadian Gini coefficient has been steadily increasing. In a study completed by Picot, G and Hou, F of Statistics Canada it was found that “Income inequality typically rises in recessions, as it did in the early 1980s and 1990s, and therefore might be expected to fall in economic expansions. But this did not occur in the late 1990s’ expansion, and this period instead displayed the largest rise income inequality in the past three decades.” This rise in income inequality continues to burden Canadian residents, increasing social determents of health within the country. The government has placed the responsibilities of housing, child care, education, retirement and much more on the individual. With all of the stress and responsibility placed on individuals, the Canadian government continues to make cuts to public expenditure on government aids. Depriving citizens of any safety nets and blaming them for being unable to acquire these underfunded social services. All of this stress has a significant impact on one’s overall health and wellness. From cancer to child mortality, nearly every
Public Policies strive to protect all citizens across the nation, includes low-income citizens who often go unrecognized in society. To make sure this happens, legislature has put forth the “The Canada Health Act”, which requires the provincial government to meet certain expectations regarding public-health care and insurance plans. Though this act states that health services are free and accessible facilities, issues arise when citizens need urgent medical attention but appointment are unavailable until weeks later. Many of these poor individuals cannot afford to pay the extra amount to receive faster care as oppose to their rich counterparts.
In a recent interview in the Ottawa Citizen, Justin Trudeau spoke on his decision to increase taxation on the wealthy upper class in order to redistribute money to the middle and lower class. This is in response to the issue of stalled median household income where Canada’s GDP has doubled yet household income has only increased by 15% (Kennedy 2015). This hints at income inequality in Canada, as it sheds light at the struggle of middle class families to provide for their families. Parents are having to choose between their retirements or providing education for their child (Kennedy 2015). To Justin Trudeau, this means that “something isn’t working anymore” (Kennedy 2015). Most likely, he senses that the way money is earned and distributed in Canada is highly unbalanced, leading to a income gap between the rich and the poor. Trudeau’s solution to middle class worries is to increases taxation on upper class
Canada 's healthcare system is praised globally for its universal and free healthcare. It started to take shape after World War II in 1945. Health insurance was introduced and was attempted, but was not successful even though there was an increase in the spending of health related services and goods. Fast forward a few years to 1961 where Tommy Douglas, the premier of Saskatchewan, developed the idea for an all-inclusive insurance plan. He later inspired the Medical Care Act in Canada in 1967, when he pointed out health care is a right for all Canadians. From this one thought, Canada has become of the many countries with a universal health care system. Ever since Tommy Douglas sparked the idea for health care coverage, Canada is praised for the way it carries out its system because of several key features. This system is publically funded, is universal and is accessible to everyone across the nation. Because this is a public system, funding comes from the tax payers and some federal funding, so there is no extra cost for the patients. Also, being a universal system it has offered care to all Canadians, immigrants and visitors. Unlike the U.S who does not provide healthcare to its entire population because it is a private system; access depends on how much someone could afford, and how
Its purpose is to provide facilities that already exist with health services and resources to provide the best possible health for Canadians (Royal Commission on Health Services, 2004). Public policy refers to the governments role in achieving an objective causing a change in society through major priorities. In this case the priority here is for every Canadian to have adequate an effective health regardless of their socio-economic status. (Role of Knowledge in Public Health, n.d., pg 89) However, this priority becomes controversial when political parties begin to get involved due to power shifts. The dilemma here is not about who is eligible to retrieve medical services but rather the policies that are made by the influence of other institutions such as marketing companies and political parties that result in health
Under Canada’s healthcare system, citizens are provided with primary care and medical treatments, as well as easy access to hospitals, clinics, and any other additional medical services. Regardless of annual income, this system allows all Canadian citizens access to medical services without immediate pay. Canada is fortunate to have a free healthcare plan since this necessity comes at a substantial expense for people living in the United States of America. For instance, the Commonwealth Fund's Health Insurance Survey mentions that “80 million people, around 43% of America's working-age adults, did not go to the doctor or access other medical services because of the cost” (Luhby). Evidently, Canada’s healthcare system is notorious in supporting the demands of the population, and creating a healthy and happy society at a manageable cost.
Income inequality is increasingly becoming a significant concern for many countries around the world. The income difference between the highly-educated, skilled, wealthy class and the poor, low to mid-skilled workers is growing larger and larger. In fact, the incomes of the rich are increasing significantly, while the low skilled workers’ incomes have been declining (The Economist, “Wealth Without Workers”). According to The Economist, real median wages have been decreasing since 2000 in half of the member countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). In the United States, there was a 4% increase from 1980 to 2012 in the share of national income that was distributed to the top 0.01% (The Economist, “True Progressivism”). Canada is facing a similar problem of rising inequality.
The Harper government tend to push aside many problems that exist in this nation. The wealth gap is widening tremendously; the rich are getting richer and the poor are still poor. According to Statistics Canada, "The top 20 per cent of Canadian families by income saw their average net worth rise from $721,900 in 1999 to $1.3 million in 2012, adjusted for inflation. Those numbers compares to the bottom
Canadians often find a great source of pride in our health care system because it is “free”. When living next to a country that loudly boasts about its freedom and other such aspects, it is hard to stand out on a global level. That is why most citizens are misguided when they try to compare our health system to that of the United States. Indeed, if you look at the facts, we do have a better system but it is quite irrelevant to compare the two since we are both organized and financed differently. The United States spends more money on their system but does not reap the benefits that more money should offer. Often, the only gain from the comparison is a political one. The federal government’s as well as the provincial governments’ funding has lead to the provinces being too hospital heavy, meaning that there aren 't enough low cost/more efficient facilities in existence such as long-term care facilities, which causes more patients to go to the hospital, which in turn causes more money to be spent than if the patient had been able to go elsewhere. Two key reasons why our health care system is so expensive are the cost of the drugs and the compensation that doctors receive. In order to keep up with the rising cost of our health care, Dalton McGuinty privatized services like physiotherapy and optometry and, “…Also froze the budgets of twelve departments other than health. There was the classic health-care spending trifecta: higher
Inequality in Canada is a growing problem. As income rises for the rich and remains the same for the poor, a gap is forming between Canada’s highest and lowest earners. This gap has sparked outrage by some, resulting in the Occupy Movement, and apathy in others. However, it can indeed be said that in Canada “the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer.”
The major difference in the healthcare delivery between Canada and the United States is Canada operates under a single payer system verses the U.S. private multi-payer system (O 'Neill & O 'Neill, 2007). In many countries, medical care is usually delivered and or financed by government funding. Unlike the United States, where most of the population pays and receives medical care through private sectors (Bodenheimer and Grumbach, 2012). In the1960’s the Canadian federal government passed the universal health insurance plan, which became fully operational by 1971. Canada’s universal health care system is fully funded by the federal and area government, where hospitals, physicians, and supplementary services are provided “free”, there are no out of pocket charges (deductibles, copayment, or premiums) to patients (O 'Neill & O 'Neill, 2007). Presently, approximately one-third of the area health expenses are funded by the federal government, provincial taxes (varies in province) cover the remainder. Legal Canadians regardless of their wealth, job or retirement status, and age (under 18 or over 65) everyone is qualified and receives equal health care coverage. Of course there are few services and persons excluded or limited under the universal health care in Canada, these include illegal immigrants and refugees (denied), dental, optical, prescription drugs, home health care, chiropractic and ambulance, services private rooms or additional nursing services if admitted
A second cause is the disunity among Canadian national and provincial jurisdictions which have made reforms very difficult. This disunity has been encouraged by neo-liberalism which in turn has moved Canada away from a “more universal, social-insurance, rights-based approach, toward a more targeted, welfare, individualist needs-tested approach” (Albanese 81). This breakdown of shared goals means the National and Provincial Governments do not always see eye to eye. Provinces, in particular, are given most of the power to create and enforce most social welfare programs. The biggest losers in this case are the poor families and children within these families. Co-operative federalism once existed in Canada but is now replaced with individualism
Medicare in Canada is a government-funded universal health insurance program established by legislation passed in 1957, 1966 and 1984 (Canada, 2012). Openly funded and administered, comprehensive, accessible hospital and medical services insurance plan has a much longer and more complex history than simply the politics of creating a federal–provincial–territorial shared-cost agreement. This viewpoint was challenged by those who stated that individuals must take responsibility for their own and their family’s health care needs through private, prepaid insurance plans, and that the government should underwrite the costs for those who could not afford such benefits Canada, 2012). In contrast to the United States, where Medicare is restricted to
The government takes responsibility of shaping the Canadian health care system and more specifically health shaping living condition based on the different public policies. Therefore, financial support such as benefits, social compensation, and many other things are providing to sustain a family affordability. Although, there are several different social determinant of health, there are different conflicting arguments that government, and policy makers. Some of the factors that evolve this essay are: poverty, and income inequality, policy and public implication, and which enhance the flaws of health in
Income inequality is defined as “Income inequality is the extent to which income is distributed unevenly in a country. It is an important indicator of equity in an economy, and has implications for other social outcomes such as crime and life satisfaction(Conference Board)." Therefore income inequality can also be defined as the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few, rather than an equal distribution of prosperity among citizens. In Canada, the unequal distribution of wealth has increased over the past twenty years. Though compared to the United States, Canada is in a much better position with greater social mobility. The fact remains that compared to
All health care in Canada is “free” for insured services, those provided through hospitals and physicians (O 'Neill, 2008). With the enactment of the Canada Health Act, citizens may choose their own family physician and do not have to pay premiums, deductibles, or co-payments. Other services such as prescription drugs or dental care must be paid for either out-of-pocket or through private insurances. Because of this “free” care, O’Neill (2008) argued that the demand for health care becomes unrestrained causing costs to surge. This inexplicably triggered shortages in all provinces and explicit rationing had to be implemented in Canada for certain medical treatments and technology (O’Neill, 2008). The high demand and severe shortages caused a large increase in private facilities providing core services.