Statistics are probably the most convenient tool for spin-doctoring because they allow one to twist the reality in a way that figures can be shown to support a particular line of thought by isolating it from the greater picture; and as such, they are the best friends for politicians, not only because of their flexibility of use, but also due to their accessibility: laymen never get to know about statistical data before politicians.
Predictable as it may be, the introduction is about the New York Times story, which was published on April 22, declaring that Canadian middle class families may have surpassed the American middle class families in wealth since 2012.
Ever since the story surfaced, Conservative MPs and politicians have been drumming to a single tune: “This has happened thanks to the policies of our great Conservative government, so make sure you vote for us again in 2015 and ditch the idea of replacing us with the Liberals.”
After so much fanfare, one might be tempted to look behind the façade to see how much the NYT story reflects the reality: First of all, the story is far from reporting a certainty, the exact quote from the story is as follows: “Median income in Canada pulled into a tie with median United States income in 2010 and has most likely surpassed it since then.
Therefore, we should understand that the latest definitive data for this particular set of comparative figures is from 2010, when there was roughly a sort of parity, and the remainder is an estimate.
Here are several questions: Does the comparison take into account the decline of the purchasing power of the Canadian dollar versus the US greenback since then? Does this particular statistic analysis accommodate the indebtedness of the US and American income categories discussed? In other words, is the seeming rise of the income of Canadian middle class a result of borrowing or increase in the earnings? For those who may not know: Canadians are one of the most indebted nations on earth with every single household, on average, owing some 164 per cent of its annual income.
Another question is why the comparison is drawn with the United States, a country, which is known for the fastest spread of income inequality in the world. (It is a very interesting coincidence that the NYT report came only a few days after the announcement of the findings of two respected US researchers, namely Prof Martin Gilens of Princeton University and Prof Benjamin I Page of Northwestern University, who say that US is no longer a democracy, but an oligarchy where the rich and powerful have an overarching influence on the government and that therefore, they get richer as the middle and low income sections of the population gets poorer {http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746}).
In all fairness, it is a fact that Canada survived the Great Recession of 2008-2009 with the least possible damage as compared to the other major industrial nations, but it was first and foremost due to the prudent line of action taken by Mark Carney, former governor of Bank of Canada, (who was apparently lured to London as a result of that success) and to some extent, to the fiscal policies put in place by late Jim Flaherty. But, dodging a recession is one thing, claiming success for non-existent economic success using dubious statistics is another.
And of course, politicians will be politicians and they will try to take the juice out of every plumb they can get their hands on. The question is how long the electorate will continue to take it.