Skip to main content
The Globe and Mail
Support Quality Journalism.
The Globe and Mail
First Access to Latest
Investment News
Collection of curated
e-books and guides
Inform your decisions via
Globe Investor Tools
Just$1.99
per week
for first 24 weeks

Enjoy unlimited digital access
Enjoy Unlimited Digital Access
Get full access to globeandmail.com
Just $1.99 per week for the first 24 weeks
Just $1.99 per week for the first 24 weeks
var select={root:".js-sub-pencil",control:".js-sub-pencil-control",open:"o-sub-pencil--open",closed:"o-sub-pencil--closed"},dom={},allowExpand=!0;function pencilInit(o){var e=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]&&arguments[1];select.root=o,dom.root=document.querySelector(select.root),dom.root&&(dom.control=document.querySelector(select.control),dom.control.addEventListener("click",onToggleClicked),setPanelState(e),window.addEventListener("scroll",onWindowScroll),dom.root.removeAttribute("hidden"))}function isPanelOpen(){return dom.root.classList.contains(select.open)}function setPanelState(o){dom.root.classList[o?"add":"remove"](select.open),dom.root.classList[o?"remove":"add"](select.closed),dom.control.setAttribute("aria-expanded",o)}function onToggleClicked(){var l=!isPanelOpen();setPanelState(l)}function onWindowScroll(){window.requestAnimationFrame(function() {var l=isPanelOpen(),n=0===(document.body.scrollTop||document.documentElement.scrollTop);n||l||!allowExpand?n&&l&&(allowExpand=!0,setPanelState(!1)):(allowExpand=!1,setPanelState(!0))});}pencilInit(".js-sub-pencil",!1); // via darwin-bg var slideIndex = 0; carousel(); function carousel() { var i; var x = document.getElementsByClassName("subs_valueprop"); for (i = 0; i < x.length; i++) { x[i].style.display = "none"; } slideIndex++; if (slideIndex> x.length) { slideIndex = 1; } x[slideIndex - 1].style.display = "block"; setTimeout(carousel, 2500); } //

Andrew Jackson is an adjunct research professor in the Institute of Political Economy at Carleton University and senior policy adviser to the Broadbent Institute.

The issue of how to deal with rising inequality and the squeezed middle class has recently moved to the centre of political debate, with the various parties proposing significant policy changes. International experience suggests that a more equal Canada will require major changes to a wide range of policy levers and not just to the tax and transfer system.

Work by the OECD and others shows that the rising income share of the affluent, especially that of the top 1 per cent, has been mainly driven by rising incomes from the market. Senior executive salaries and bonuses, as well as investment returns, have grown much more rapidly than the wages of the middle class and those at the bottom of the income spectrum.

Story continues below advertisement

Inequality is mainly an issue of a more unfair "predistribution" of income and wealth by the market, driven by such economic forces as globalization, technological change, the decline of union bargaining power and the growing proportion of low paid and insecure jobs.

That said, inequality of after-tax income has been compounded by a trend towards reduced redistribution through the tax and transfer system. In most countries there has been a move to lower top income tax rates and reduced taxation of corporate profits, as well as cuts to income support programs such as unemployment insurance, welfare and public pensions.

In Canada the tax and transfer system still redistributes significantly from the more to the less affluent, but its impact was greatly reduced from the early 1990s by deep cuts to unemployment insurance and social assistance even as inequality in market income increased. In fact, Canada has shifted from being one of the most redistributive countries in the OECD to one of the least redistributive.

Changes to the tax and transfer system such as moving to a more progressive personal income tax and enhancing income supports for families with children and the working poor are being proposed to shrink the growing income gap. These reforms should indeed be pursued.

However, political scientists have drawn attention to the paradox of redistribution. As a matter of historical experience, the most redistributive tax and transfer policies and most generous public services have been enacted in those countries in which market incomes have been most equal.

In the heyday of Swedish social democracy, wages were remarkably equal due to strong unions and a solidarity wage policy, and the government then also redistributed through the world's most advanced welfare state. Meanwhile in the United States, an already weak welfare state was not strengthened as inequality mounted.

A glance at the social indicators published annually by the OECD shows that government social spending still tends to be below average in high inequality countries, now including Canada, and above average in the more equal countries of northern Europe.

Story continues below advertisement

Rising inequality is politically self reinforcing to the degree that it increases the political weight of the rich as well the distance between the well off and everyone else. Extreme inequality sets the stage for a "secession of the affluent" to gated communities and private elite universities and high-quality privatized health-care.

If market income inequality is allowed to inexorably rise, one can expect even more resistance by the well off to redistributive policies. This suggests that more must also be done to equalize market incomes.

Possible policy levers include more public investment in high-quality child care, in education and in lifelong skills training, as well as labour market reforms such as higher minimum wages and more union-friendly labour laws. Changes to corporate governance to better control top pay are also in order.

Redistributive tax and transfer policies are certainly needed to fight inequality. But they are far from the whole story.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies