by Mark Sholdice
Something I’ve come to realize since coming to Princeton from Canada is the praise given to my country by American progressives. Canada, it seems, is viewed by many as a paragon of enlightened and liberal governance. For instance, our relative level of economic equality seems excellent. But before American progressives move too quickly to try to adopt our policies, I think it is important to look at all of the details.
For instance, in Canada the threshold for the top 1% of income earners is $230 000 Canadian. (N.B.: $1 Canadian = $0.99 US). This group receives 14% of total income. In the US, the threshold for the top 1% is $345 000; here, their share of total income is 17%. At least in terms of income inequality, Canada seems to be doing something right.
Canada, of course, has achieved greater income equality through higher levels of personal taxation and redistribution in the form of spending on social programs. But it is important to know that this may be built on certain national characteristics: greater respect for authority and trust in government than in the US. Although more recent work has pointed to a decline in such attitudes among Canadians (see for example, Lance W. Roberts et al, eds., “Recent Social Trends in Canada, 1960-2000”, 2005), I think the relative strength of the welfare state is due in large part to this unique constellation of social attitudes.
The achievement of greater income equality is made despite, or perhaps due to, a strikingly inelastic social order. Last week, Matt Yglesias referenced a research finding by Canadian economist Miles Corak. The latter discovered that in Canada, around 7 of 10 men born to fathers in the top 1% were employed by the same firm as their fathers. This of course leads to an inevitable question, as Corak points out: if such nepotism is so prevalent in a country with relatively high social mobility like Canada, what is the situation in the US? Or could it be possible that elite nepotism is less widespread here?
Thus I think it is important to keep in mind national context when discussing progressive policies. But there is much, of course, that liberals in each country can learn from each other. For instance, as an activist in the Liberal Party of Canada, I’m quite interested in hearing more from Democrats about political organizing, especially given the success the Conservative Party of Canada has had in importing Republican ideas – but that is a topic for another day.
