Eugene Debs

Eugene V. Debs, the leader of the Socialist Party of the United States, who ran for President of the United States while in jail for opposing WWI ,was born today.

Eugene V. Debs (1855-1926)

poses with N. Krishna of Bombay (left) and Frank P. O'Hare (right), 1907. Photograph by Bell, Girard, Kansas. Gift of Ann C. Baxter

Yes America had a Socialist Party, in fact it had several, all popular at the turn of last century. Debs joined with Western Miners Union leader Big Bill Haywood and Daniel DeLeon, leader of the Socialist Labour Party, as founding members of the Industrial Workers of the World.

"The old form of trade unionism," cried Debs, "no longer meets the demands of the working class ... It is now positively reactionary, and is maintained, not in the interests of the workers who support it, but in the interests of the capitalist class who exploit the workers." So long as the working class was parceled out among thousands of separate unions, united economic and political action would be impossible. The IWW provided new hope.

Fellow Worker Eugene V Debs | Selected IWW Member Biographies

He was a popular socialist leader who championed the workers cause and in return even those who politically disagreed with him on the left praised him.

E.V. Debs by James P Cannon

My favorite Debs quote which is still relevant today;

"When the working class unites, there will be a lot of jobless labor leaders." Eugene Debs, 1905 speech to the IWW Convention

We could use a Debs today. Especially in the U.S. Presidential Elections. There is a need for a third party and Debs recognized that it should be a party of the working people. The other two of course represent the ruling classes regardless of how inclusive they may be.

"The Republican and Democratic parties, or, to be more exact, the Republican-Democratic party, represent the capitalist class in the class struggle. They are the political wings of the capitalist system and such differences as arise between them relate to spoils and not to principles." Eugene V. Debs

Debs was one of the most prominent labor organizers and political activists of his time. He was also nominated as the Socialist Party's candidate for president five times. His voting tallies over his first four campaigns effectively illustrate the remarkable growth of the party during that volatile time period:

1900: 94,768
1904: 402,400
1908: 402,820
1912: 897,011

1900 > Popular Votes for Eugene Debs * [ pie chart ] [ map ]

1904 > Popular Votes for Eugene Debs * [ pie chart ] [ map ]

1908 > Popular Votes for Eugene Debs * [ pie chart ] [ map ]

1912 > Popular Votes for Eugene Debs * [ pie chart ] [ map ]

1920 > Popular Votes for Eugene Debs * [ pie chart ] [ map ]

What This Country Needs . . .

'Eugene V. Debs' Is Staging Another White House Bid

By Robin Shulman

Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, May 6, 2007; Page D02

NEW YORK -- The politician took the stage amid red balloons and American flags and spoke his famous fighting words: "I'd rather vote for something I want and not get it than vote for something I don't want and get it."

With this, Eugene V. Debs last week announced his sixth bid for U.S. president

Dead man running.

The real Eugene V. Debs passed away in 1926, after five unsuccessful bids for the presidency from 1900 to 1920. But actor Brian Pickett is staging a modest, mock presidential run in his name, starting with Wednesday night's campaign kickoff in a tiny, crowded bar in Manhattan's East Village.

The actual Debs ran on the Socialist Party ticket -- the fifth time from a prison cell -- after being convicted under the Espionage Act of 1917 for speaking out against World War I. Though never even close to being elected, he became a national figure who galvanized people with his fervor and idealism. Pickett's theatrical performance, to continue in various forms until the 2008 election, "will resurrect this fiery leader from historical bondage," according to the campaign literature.

The quadrennial season of windbaggery is upon us. Canned speeches, quick retractions, the same old sound bites -- we're in for months and months of it. The more we hear, the more we pine for something authentic. This small-time utopian campaign speaks to that frustration, said Pickett, 28, who teaches drama to New York public school students and has appeared in independent theater productions.

Pickett, like Debs, is tall and wiry. You could even say his gaze echoes Debs biographer Nick Salvatore's description: "piercing yet loving." On Wednesday, Pickett wore a three-piece suit with watch fob and spectacles. As the race develops, he plans to work with campaign manager Sophie Nimmannit, 27, the "Red Genie" -- who wore a short red dress, red feather hat, slash of red lipstick and a scarf printed with the word "Vote" -- in street, bar and theater performances in New York and other cities ( http://www.myspace.com/votedebs).

"I wish you were all socialists," Pickett told his audience of about 35 people. They were artists, activists, at least one Wall Streeter -- and they laughed. Even in Debs's time, many of those who came to hear his impassioned speeches were not socialists. He attracted working- and middle-class people and whipped them into such a frenzy that at one event, according to Salvatore, in the book "Eugene V. Debs: Citizen and Socialist," one woman asked another, "Is that Debs?" and the first answered, "Oh no, that ain't Debs -- when Debs comes out, you'll think it's Jesus Christ."

Debs, originally from Terre Haute, Ind., married an upper-class woman who became famous for wearing diamonds to visit him in jail, and he grew more radical as he got older. His life spanned that brief window when socialism was not yet a dirty word but rather a new idea from Europe. He tried to Americanize it, claiming Ralph Waldo Emerson and Henry David Thoreau as precursors, wrote Salvatore. America was becoming the greatest industrial power of the world, and the questions socialism addressed were on everyone's mind. In 1912, Debs drew 6 percent of the national presidential vote.

Things have changed. The socialist demands of Debs's time -- the eight-hour workday, abolition of child labor, equal pay for equal work -- have become standard, if not always applied. The word "socialist" seldom comes up. And there are new problems.

"Oh where, oh where have my benefits gone, oh where, oh where can they be?" sang a character in Wednesday's show. The finely dressed Capitalist chimed in: "My PDA's beeping, I'm afraid I can't stay. I'm self-employed and I work all day."

"I would vote for him in a New York minute because he speaks his mind," said Andy Shulman, 34, the actor playing the Capitalist, who works a Wall Street day job. He adds that he is not interested in the radical or extreme, but in someone without the slickness and distance of the big campaign.

"Has a dead man ever run for president?" asked Nola Strand, 24, who played accordion for the show. "Dead men have voted."

Pickett's idea came from television's "West Wing," when Jimmy Smits's character, Matthew V. Santos, ran for president, and fans of the show donned "Vote Santos" shirts and bought "Vote Santos" mugs. If a fictional character could gain a constituency, why not a dead one?

But the ardors of a Debs campaign could wear on him.

In 1900, Debs crisscrossed the country and slept upright on long train trips, refusing to take a Pullman berth with a bed because of labor problems at that company. In 1908, he traveled on his own Red Special train. His speeches could run to two hours, and he would often give 10 a day.

Pickett said he's not sure he has the funds to command a 2008 Red Special. He cut Debs's speeches to something like sound bites, which often sound familiar, except for the florid language. (On war: "The working class who fight all the battles, the working class who make the supreme sacrifices, the working class who freely shed their blood and furnish the corpses, have never yet had a voice in either declaring war or making peace. It is the ruling class that invariably does both.")

Eugene V. Debs
Harper's Weekly, August 15, 1896

"How I Became a Socialist"
Eugene V. Debs

It all seems very strange to me now, taking a backward look, that my vision was so focalized on single objective point that I utterly failed to see what now appears as clear as the noonday sun.... The skirmish lines of the American Railway Union were well advanced. A series of small battles were fought and won without the loss of a man.... Next followed the final shock--the Pullman strike--and the American Railway Union again won, clear and complete. The combined corporations were paralized and helpless. At this juncture there were delivered, from wholly unexpected quarters, a swift succession of blows that blinded me for an instant and then opened wide my eyes....

An army of detectives, thugs, and murderers were equipped with badge and bludgeon and turned loose; old hulks of cars were fired; the alarm bells tolled; the people were terrified; the most startling rumors were set afloat; the press volleyed and thundered; and over all the wires sped the news that Chicago's white throat was in the clutch of a red mob; injunctions flew thick and fast, arrests followed, and our office and headquarters, the heart of the strike, was sacked, torn out and nailed up by the "lawful" authorities of the federal government; and when in company with my loyal comrades I found myself in Cook County jail at Chicago with the whole press screaming conspiracy, treason and murder ... I had another exceedingly practical and impressive lesson in Socialism.

The Chicago jail sentences were followed by six months at Woodstock and it was here that Socialism gradually laid hold of me in its own irresistible fashion. Books and pamphlets and letters from Socialists came by every mail and I began to read and think and dissect the anatomy of the system in which workingmen, however organized, could be shattered and battered and splintered...
--From the New York Comrade, April 1902, in Speeches of Eugene V. Debs (New York: International Publisher, 1928)

"Will it succeed?" has been the uppermost question in the minds of thousands of people regarding the effort in co-operation at Ruskin. "Can such an enterprise be made permanent, even if it does attain material success?" and "Will the men and women engaged in it be able to hold together and work together for their common interests?" ... Ruskin HAS SUCCEEDED, and the measure and kind of its success INSURES ITS PERMANENCY and the accomplishing of greater things in the future. We are now in the material stage of development and the close of the first year of co-operation shows a favorable termination to the enterprises started in that time. The year began with the establishment of a co-operative hotel on the old site, it closes with the occupancy of the commodious and substantial structure, herewith illustrated, on the new. THE COMING NATION publishing house is the largest building in this section of Tennessee. It is a frame structure, built entirely of oak, sawed from timber taken from our own land and in our own saw mill. Everything entering into its construction that possibly could be made by Ruskinites is a product of co-operative labor.... --The Coming Nation, July 18, 1896

Not "free silver," not "free trade," not "free gold," not "free high tariff" is what the working class needs. All of these "free" things are like free coffins to be buried in. Our slogan is "Free the Tools of Production."
--The People, New York, in Public Opinion, August 6, 1896

Socialist Eugene V. Debs speaks during the presidential campaign of 1904

Eugene V. Debs

Socialist Eugene V. Debs was one of the major players in American politics at the turn of the 20th century. He made five attempts to gain the presidency - in 1900, 1904, 1908 1912 and 1920 - all as the standard bearer of the Socialist Party. He conducted his last campaign from behind the bars of a federal prison. A gifted orator, Debs rivaled William Jennings Bryan in his ability to move a crowd with his words.

Born in Indiana in 1855, Debs went to work for the railroad at age 14 but soon gave it up at his mother's urging. He became active in the union movement forming the American Railway Union, the nation's largest, in 1893. Arrested during the Pullman Strike of 1894, he served six months behind bars. In jail, Debs converted to socialism. He helped found the Social Democratic Party of America in 1897, the Socialist Party in 1901 and the Industrial Workers of the World in 1905. "I am for socialism because I am for humanity" he declared.

He opposed America's entrance into World War I and denounced the Espionage Act designed to silence all antiwar sentiment. In 1918, he received a 10-year prison sentence for his public opposition to the war. At his trial, Debs admitted he spoke the words the federal government considered traitorous and addressed the jury in his own defense. "I am doing what little I can to do away with the rule of the great body of people by a relatively small class and establish in this country industrial and social democracy." A guilty verdict sent Debs to the federal prison in Atlanta.

In 1920, the Socialist Party again nominated him as their presidential candidate and over 915,000 voted for prisoner #9653. President Wilson vigorously denied a request for Deb's pardon in 1921. Finally, Warren G. Harding released Debs under a general amnesty on Christmas Day 1921. Harding asked the old socialist to stop by the White House. "I have heard so damned much about you, Mr Debs, that I am very glad to meet you personally" Harding remarked at their meeting. Debs died in 1926.

References: Currie, Harold W., Eugene V. Debs (1976); Morgan, H. Wayne, Eugene V. Debs: Socialist for President (1973).

Winning a World - Recording or Recording with Transcript

Date of Recording: 1904

Duration: 6:50 Call Number: VVL 077

This speech was originally delivered in 1904 and shortly thereafter recorded at one of Edison's sound recording studios. By this time Debs was a leading figure in the U.S. Socialist party, and in this impassioned speech describes a time when the socialist party will "win the world" from the 'frenzied revelry of capitalism." "What man," Debs asks, "unless his brain be atrophied and has become blinded can fail to perceive the impending crisis of a capitalist modern age?" The central metaphor of this speech is "the machine," which refers to the the proliferation of new labor-saving technologies, inventions that Debs saw as fundamental to the social revolution. Here Debs celebrates technology as a great equalizer and emancipator of the working classes: "The mute message of the machine, could but the worker understand and could he but heed it, child of his brain, the machine has come to free and not to enslave; to save and not destroy the author of its being... The machine compels the grand army of toil to rally to its tender, to recognize its power."

Debs Attacks “the Monstrous System” of Capitalism

In 1912, four candidates battled to become President of the United States. Republican incumbent William Howard Taft and Democrat Woodrow Wilson, a moderate governor, represented the two major parties. Former President Theodore Roosevelt, angered over what he felt was a betrayal of his policies by Taft, his hand-picked successor, abandoned the Republican party and founded the Progressive or “Bull Moose” Party. While all four candidates appealed directly to working-class voters, whose votes would prove decisive, by far the most radical platform in the campaign was that of the Socialist Party nominee, Eugene V. Debs. Running for the fourth time, Debs called for the abolition of capitalism rather than for its reform. In this speech accepting the party’s nomination he proclaimed the Socialist Party “the party of progress, the party of the future.” Debs finished last in the contest, receiving 900,000 votes.

The Canton Ohio Antiwar Speech

By Eugene Victor Debs

---

Eugene Debs delivering his legendary speech in Canton, Ohio on June 16, 1918.

Comrades, friends and fellow-workers, for this very cordial greeting, this very hearty reception, I thank you all with the fullest appreciation of your interest in and your devotion to the cause for which I am to speak to you this afternoon.

To speak for labor; to plead the cause of the men and women and children who toil; to serve the working class, has always been to me a high privilege; a duty of love.

I have just returned from a visit over yonder, where three of our most loyal comrades are paying the penalty for their devotion to the cause of the working class. They have come to realize, as many of us have, that it is extremely dangerous to exercise the constitutional right of free speech in a country fighting to make democracy safe in the world.

I realize that, in speaking to you this afternoon, there are certain limitations placed upon the right of free speech. I must be exceedingly careful, prudent, as to what I say, and even more careful and prudent as to how I say it. I may not be able to say all I think; but I am not going to say anything that I do not think. I would rather a thousand times be a free soul in jail than to be a sycophant and coward in the streets. They may put those boys in jail—and some of the rest of us in jail—but they cannot put the Socialist movement in jail. Those prison bars separate their bodies from ours, but their souls are here this afternoon. They are simply paying the penalty that all men have paid in all the ages of history for standing erect, and for seeking to pave the way to better conditions for mankind.

If it had not been for the men and women who, in the past, have had the moral courage to go to jail, we would still be in the jungles.

Wars throughout history have been waged for conquest and plunder. In the Middle Ages when the feudal lords who inhabited the castles whose towers may still be seen along the Rhine concluded to enlarge their domains, to increase their power, their prestige and their wealth they declared war upon one another. But they themselves did not go to war any more than the modern feudal lords, the barons of Wall Street go to war. The feudal barons of the Middle Ages, the economic predecessors of the capitalists of our day, declared all wars. And their miserable serfs fought all the battles. The poor, ignorant serfs had been taught to revere their masters; to believe that when their masters declared war upon one another, it was their patriotic duty to fall upon one another and to cut one another’s throats for the profit and glory of the lords and barons who held them in contempt. And that is war in a nutshell. The master class has always declared the wars; the subject class has always fought the battles. The master class has had all to gain and nothing to lose, while the subject class has had nothing to gain and all to lose—especially their lives.

They have always taught and trained you to believe it to be your patriotic duty to go to war and to have yourselves slaughtered at their command. But in all the history of the world you, the people, have never had a voice in declaring war, and strange as it certainly appears, no war by any nation in any age has ever been declared by the people.

And here let me emphasize the fact—and it cannot be repeated too often—that the working class who fight all the battles, the working class who make the supreme sacrifices, the working class who freely shed their blood and furnish the corpses, have never yet had a voice in either declaring war or making peace. It is the ruling class that invariably does both. They alone declare war and they alone make peace.

Yours not to reason why; Yours but to do and die.

That is their motto and we object on the part of the awakening workers of this nation.

If war is right let it be declared by the people. You who have your lives to lose, you certainly above all others have the right to decide the momentous issue of war or peace.

Statement to the Court
Eugene Debs, September 18, 1918

Eugene Debs delivered his Statement to the Court to the Federal Court of Cleveland, Ohio on September 18, 1918 after being convicted of violating the Sedition Act, a protective law passed by Congress to promote the war by banning anti-war propaganda and rhetoric. Under this new law many socialists were unjustly persecuted and stripped of their freedom of speech. As an active socialist, Debs became concerned and attacked American capitalism in an effort to protect first amendment rights. This speech was a plea in his defense for his and other socialists’ freedom of speech. Introduction by Mary Litton Fowler.

Enacts movement from rupture to constitution through identification with marginalized class	Your Honor,years ago I recognized my kinship with all living beings, and I made up my mind that I was not one bit better than the meanest on earth. I said then, and I say now, that while there is a lower class, I am in it, and while there is a criminal element I am of it, and while there is a soul in prison, I am not free.
Invokes revolutionary tradition	I listened to all that was said in this court in support and justification of this prosecution, but my mind remains unchanged. I look upon the Espionage Law as a despotic enactment in flagrant conflict with democratic principles and with the spirit of free institutions…
oppositional	Your Honor, I have stated in this court that I am opposed to the social system in which we live; that I believe in a fundamental change—but if possible by peaceable and orderly means…
	Standing here this morning, I recall my boyhood. At fourteen I went to work in a railroad shop; at sixteen I was firing a freight engine on a railroad. I remember all the hardships and privations of that earlier day, and from that time until now my heart has been with the working class. I could have been in Congress long ago. I have preferred to go to prison…
Mammon: Gospel allusion (oppositional tradition accepted by and borrowed from dominant public)	I am thinking this morning of the men in the mills and the factories; of the men in the mines and on the railroads. I am thinking of the women who for a paltry wage are compelled to work out their barren lives; of the little children who in this system are robbed of their childhood and in their tender years are seized in the remorseless grasp of Mammon and forced into the industrial dungeons, there to feed the monster machines while they themselves are being starved and stunted, body and soul. I see them dwarfed and diseased and their little lives broken and blasted because in this high noon of Christian civilization money is still so much more important than the flesh and blood of childhood. In very truth gold is god today and rules with pitiless sway in the affairs of men.
Invokes providence; expresses sense of rupture between land of plenty and suffering of millions; transfers guilt from providence to society	In this country—the most favored beneath the bending skies—we have vast areas of the richest and most fertile soil, material resources in inexhaustible abundance, the most marvelous productive machinery on earth, and millions of eager workers ready to apply their labor to that machinery to produce in abundance for every man, woman, and child—and if there are still vast numbers of our people who are the victims of poverty and whose lives are an unceasing struggle all the way from youth to old age, until at last death comes to their rescue and lulls these hapless victims to dreamless sleep, it is not the fault of the Almighty: it cannot be charged to nature, but it is due entirely to the outgrown social system in which we live that ought to be abolished not only in the interest of the toiling masses but in the higher interest of all humanity…
Radical extension	I believe, Your Honor, in common with all Socialists, that this nation ought to own and control its own industries. I believe, as all Socialists do, that all things that are jointly needed and used ought to be jointly owned—that industry, the basis of our social life, instead of being the private property of a few and operated for their enrichment, ought to be the common property of all, democratically administered in the interest of all…
	I am opposing a social order in which it is possible for one man who does absolutely nothing that is useful to amass a fortune of hundreds of millions of dollars, while millions of men and women who work all the days of their lives secure barely enough for a wretched existence.
Re-genesis	This order of things cannot always endure. I have registered my protest against it. I recognize the feebleness of my effort, but, fortunately, I am not alone. There are multiplied thousands of others who, like myself, have come to realize that before we may truly enjoy the blessings of civilized life, we must reorganize society upon a mutual and cooperative basis; and to this end we have organized a great economic and political movement that spreads over the face of all the earth.
Communality	There are today upwards of sixty millions of Socialists, loyal, devoted adherents to this cause, regardless of nationality, race, creed, color, or sex. They are all making common cause. They are spreading with tireless energy the propaganda of the new social order. They are waiting, watching, and working hopefully through all the hours of the day and the night. They are still in a minority. But they have learned how to be patient and to bide their time. The feel—they know, indeed—that the time is coming, in spite of all opposition, all persecution, when this emancipating gospel will spread among all the peoples, and when this minority will become the triumphant majority and, sweeping into power, inaugurate the greates social and economic change in history.
	In that day we shall have the universal commonwealth—the harmonious cooperation of every nation with every other nation on earth…
	Your Honor, I ask no mercy and I plead for no immunity. I realize that finally the right must prevail. I never so clearly comprehended as now the great struggle between the powers of greed and exploitation on the one hand and upon the other the rising hosts of industrial freedom and social justice.
Re-genesis	I can see the dawn of the better day for humanity. The people are awakening. In due time they will and must come to their own.
Re-genesis	When the mariner, sailing over tropic seas, looks for relief from his weary watch, he turns his eyes toward the southern cross, burning luridly above the tempest-vexed ocean. As the midnight approaches, the southern cross begins to bend, the whirling worlds change their places, and with starry finger-points the Almighty marks the passage of time upon the dial of the universe, and though no bell may beat the glad tidings, the lookout knows that the midnight is passing and that relief and rest are close at hand. Let the people everywhere take heart of hope, for the cross is bending, the midnight is passing, and joy cometh with the morning.
	I am now prepared to receive your sentence.

Eugene V. Debs

Time Magazine, Monday, Nov. 01, 1926

As it must to all men, Death came last week to Eugene Victor Debs, Socialist.

In Woodstock, Ill., there is a boys' school, a collection of retired farmers, a prison. In the prison in the year 1895 sat a hot-blooded orator† of 40. He was Eugene Victor Debs, labor leader. He was in jail for the violation of an injunction. Back of this event was the story of an Indiana grocery clerk, a locomotive fireman, who became the organizer of the American Railway Union, who twice made the nation feel the fist of unionized labor. The second time was the great strike against the Pullman Co. in 1894 when President Cleveland had to despatch troops to Chicago to quell the riotous bloodshed. Eugene Debs and three others, indicted for conspiracy against the Government, were successfully defended by Clarence S. Darrow. Later Mr. Debs defied an injunction—and that is why he found himself in Woodstock. One day he had a visitor, Socialist Victor L. Berger. The visitor left him an unimportant-looking little book.

Prisoner Debs read it slowly, eagerly, ravenously. The book was Karl Marx's Das Kapital. In the brain of Prisoner Debs there began to simmer a more militant type of Socialism for the U. S. than the mere reading of Utopian books.

Mr. Debs came from his cell with a gospel. In Chicago, 100,000 cheered him as he roared out his speech on "Liberty." Then, strangely enough, he stumped for Candidate Bryan in 1896. A year later the Socialist party was born, and in five presidential elections from 1900 to 1920 (except in 1916) Mr. Debs was a candidate, polling almost a million votes in each of his last two campaigns.

During the World War he attacked war in general and the draft in particular; was sentenced to ten years' imprisonment for a speech made in Canton, Ohio, in 1918. Addressing the jury, he told his creed:

"Gentlemen, I have been accused of obstructing the War. I admit it, gentlemen; I abhor war. I would oppose the War if I stood alone. . ..

"Years ago I recognized my kinship with all living beings, and I made up my mind that I was not one bit better than the meanest of the earth. I said then, and I say now, that while there is a lower class, I am in it; while there is a criminal element, I am of it; while there is a soul in prison, I am not free."

On Christmas Day, 1921, President Harding pardoned a model prisoner, a broken prophet. Around him he saw his Socialist Party disintegrating; within him he felt his strength ebbing. His speeches seemed almost pathetic; his pen had lost its throb. A month ago he went to a sanitarium in Elmhurst, Ill., where he died, aged 71.

Said Arthur Brisbane, Hearst columnist:

"Eugene V. Debs, a sincere and honest man, is dead, killed by imprisonment inflicted upon him for saying what he thought about the War."

†James Whitcomb Riley once wrote: And there's Gene Debs, a man that stands And jest holds out in his two hands As warm a heart as ever beat 'Twixt here and jedgment seat.

REFERENCES:

EugeneVDebs.com, the official site of the Eugene V. Debs Foundation.

Eugene V. Debs Internet Archive

Dubbing Debs: An Actor Records a Speech by Eugene Debs

Gentle Rebel: Letters of Eugene V. Debs - Google Books

The Socialist Party: Eugene V. Debs and the Radical Politics of the American Working Class... - Google Books

The Eugene V. Debs Reader: Socialism And The Class Struggle

Read complete books and articles on: Eugene V. Debs

Eugene V. Debs: an American paradox

Nick Salvatore / Eugene V. Debs

Eugene V. Debs: Pullman Strike Leader and Socialist

The debs way - American Socialist Party leader Eugene V. Debs

The Bending Cross by Ray Ginger; Introduction by Mike Davis

Eugene V. Debs and the U.S. socialist tradition

Writings and Speeches of Eugene V Debs

Eugene V. Debs and the Idea of Socialism - late leader of the Socialist Party

"In Spiritual Communion: Eugene V. Debs and the Socialist Christians."

DEBS ON YOUTUBE

Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:

labour history, socialist Party USA, IWW, history, America, socialism, Eugene Debs, red scare, Anti-war, U.S. Presidential Elections,

A Tax Break The Fraser Institute Hates

Now this is ironic. A tax break the Fraser Institute doesn't like.

“Canadians are investing in labour sponsored funds to get generous tax credits, not because the want to invest in Canadian entrepreneurs or expect to earn a high rate of return,”

Of course it's a tax break for the working class not the parasites of the investing class.


See:

Flaherty's Smoke and Mirrors

Vencap

Fire Sale

More Income Trust Fallout

A Peoples Program for Alberta

Workers Want Tax Credits NOT Tax Cuts

Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
Fraser Institute, Labour Sponsored Funds,tax breaks, venture capital,union sponsored investment,

The Carbuncle of Class War

This has been a well known fact for years Marx suffered from boils. Now some dweeb is explaining his theories of alienation experienced by the working class under capitalism as the result of his condition.

Karl Marx suffered from a skin disease that can cause severe psychological effects such as self-loathing and alienation, according to a British dermatologist.

The father of communism’s life and attitudes were shaped by hidradenitis suppurativa, said Sam Shuster in the British Journal of Dermatology. One of its symptoms is alienation – a concept that Marx, a martyr to boils and carbuncles, put into words as he wrote Das Kapital.

“In addition to reducing his ability to work, which contributed to his depressing poverty, hidradenitis greatly reduced his self-esteem. This explains his self-loathing and alienation, a response reflected by the alienation Marx developed in his writing.”

This is reductum ad absurdum that results from a shallow attempt to deconstruct Marx. And it isn't even new. It is pop psychology of the right, an attempt to dismiss ideas by dissing the man. Not unlike Aileen Kelly's attack on Bakunin.

The fact is that Marx's poverty exasperated his disease. If anything his suffering poverty, like that of his fellow European working class immigrants to England, placed him within the class. And his skin condition had nothing to do with his revolutionary ideas, he had evolved those long before his skin condition became a problem.

Karl Marx did his best writing on deadline.

Commissioned by the Communist League in mid-1847 to write a "profession of faith," Marx and Engels procrastinated, traveled, experimented with form and might never have written the manifesto of the Communist Party if not for a sternly worded letter from the league ordering them to deliver the document by February 1, 1848.

A few all-nighters later, Marx produced a stirring document that by now has been read by tens of millions of people. Far fewer realize that regular deadline commentary provided Marx with the closest thing he ever had to actual employment. From 1852 to 1862 he was a regular London correspondent for the New York Tribune. All told, Marx contributed almost 500 columns to the Tribune (about a quarter of which were actually written by Engels). Marx's newspaper writing takes up nearly seven volumes of the fifty-volume Collected Works of Marx and Engels--more than Capital and indeed more than any of Marx's works published in book form.

The Tribune was in some ways a logical place for Marx's journalism. The paper was founded in 1841 by Horace Greeley as a crusading organ of progressive causes with a pronounced American and Christian flavor; one contemporary writer described the paper's political stance as "Anti-Slavery, Anti-War, Anti-Rum, Anti-Tobacco, Anti-Seduction, Anti-Grogshops, Anti-Brothels, Anti-Gambling Houses." During Marx's tenure as a correspondent, the Tribune was the largest newspaper in the world, reaching more than 200,000 readers.

At the same time, there was probably no publication in the world that would have been a perfect fit for Marx's cantankerous prose and personality. Even when Marx wrote in English, his strident Germanic tone dominated. His analysis was so unsparingly radical that at times the Tribune felt the need to distance itself from its fulminating London correspondent; introducing one of his 1853 essays, for example, the editors wrote, "Mr. Marx has very decided opinions of his own, with some of which we are far from agreeing," but then conceded that "those who do not read his letters neglect one of the most instructive sources of information on the greatest questions of current European politics."

Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
Karl Marx,, Marxism,,Das Kapital,,carbuncle,,alienation,,class war,,boils

Tax Cuts For All

Instead of capital gains tax cuts (which only impact the rich) or further tax cuts for corporations how about eliminating income taxes (payroll taxes) for working Canadians and families who earn less than $100,000 a year.

Tax break not dead: Flaherty
The Harper government is examining how to make good on its pledge to grant Canadians a capital gains tax break in the 2008 budget, says Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, who avoided the measure in the last two fiscal plans because of cost and design difficulties.

Mr. Dion's tax strategy, so far, is promising enough. He aims to cut the corporate rate to 18.5%, a rate that, however, coincides with the rate some corporate insiders have heard Conservative officials talk about. Is Mr. Dion scalping Tory policy?

While the average Canadian family earns far less than $100,000, those in professions and in trades earn above the average. Revenue Canada and Stats Canada define high income earners as having an income of over $113,000 annually.

An argument could be made for elimination of taxes at the $80,000 a year level, however due to geography this would have a negative impact on higher paid workers in the Arctic, Northwest Territories, Yukon, etc. where prices are also higher.

Also family incomes can be blended to reach $100,000. Whether we speak of eliminating income taxes for individuals at the $50,000 per annum income level or families at $100,000, I am open to debate on this issue. So far I have seen few who were willing to take me up on it right or left. Despite the tax tinkering being promoted by the Liberals and Conservatives.

Eliminating Income taxes on workers and working families would go a long way to eliminating the prosperity gap the NDP talks about. You will see from the statistical studies below that the income gap between rich and the working class grew, and that they benefited from reductions through tax cuts and tax credits, including the myth of how they pay more GST. In fact they don't since their monies are tied up in cars and homes and other consumer goods, but in stocks and investments, and in fact they pay less luxury tax than the average worker does when GST and PST are added up.

And while the stats show that income support payments from EI, welfare, AISH, etc. have a positive economic impact on the working poor, this would be better offset by a program that created a Guaranteed National Living Wage. Something the Green Party has joined the NDP in calling for though neither of them go far enough.

The Libertarian Party of Canada does advocate for the reduction of and maybe the elimination of income taxes. To be replaced by user fees to pay for the privatization of public services! While the CPCML adovcates Make The Rich Pay! which I agree with and in fact take a more libertarian position than the LPC or the so called fiscal libertarians in the Conservative Party!

During the last federal election, the Marxist-Leninist Party of Canada (MLPC) addressed the question of government revenue and taxation as follows:

"The Marxist-Leninist Party of Canada does not agree with the manner in which the issue of taxes is posed by the big parties and most media. Income taxes were introduced during World War I as a temporary measure and reflect an archaic viewpoint that owners of equity and debt are the centre of the economy, and Canadians and the state should serve the most powerful corporations."

Governments should keep their hands off personal incomes. Governments should fund program expenditures from their claim on the aggregate social product, not from that portion of social product the working people have managed to claim in the form of wages and salaries.

Who produces that wealth? The working people do. After the claims of the workers who produce the wealth have been distributed at their workplaces, the government should make its claim on the workplaces itself. It should appropriate directly from companies over a certain size enough social product to fund the costs of the social programs and infrastructure required for modern production in a modern society and a human and natural environment fit for human beings. A modern transportation and energy infrastructure for example are needed for modern production to take place in a society. Why then shouldn't those requirements be paid for from the aggregate social product of the society and appropriated directly at the point of production? Government revenue is a claim on the provincial social product. In its self-proclaimed drive to modernize, the Ontario government should stop the unacceptable practice of stealing the claims of working people on the social product and abolish the archaic income tax system, sales taxes and the myriad other taxes and service charges that takes money from the people. The claim (revenue) of the Ontario government should come directly from enterprises above a certain size that are engaged in producing social product or distributing, servicing and financing it.

The point is that no existing parliamentary party is talking about eliminating income taxes for the majority Canadians who now carry the burden of funding the government, which should be paid for by the Corporations and the rich since it's their state after all.

Income Inequality and Redistribution in Canada: 1976 to 2004

After remaining stable across the late 1970s and 1980s, family after-tax-income inequality rose during the 1990s. This increase occurred at the same time as a reduction in the generosity of several income transfer programs, including the Employment Insurance and Social Assistance Programs (in some provinces), and decreases in income tax rates. This potentially reflects a weakening of the redistributive role of the Canadian state.

However, while rising after-tax-income inequality can result from a weakening redistribution system, it can also result from rising inequality in family market (pre-tax, pre-transfer) income. In this report we address the following question: Is income redistribution playing a smaller equalizing role in recent years than it did in the past, or is increasing inequality being driven by rising familiy market-income inequality?

A close examination of after-tax income reveals that from 1989 to 2004, income fell for lower-income families but grew for middle- and higher-income families. Average income in the bottom 10% fell by 8% over this period, but rose by 8% at the median and by 24% in the top 10%. As a result, the absolute range between those with income in the bottom 10% and those in the top 10% also rose. In real dollars, after-tax income for a four-person family was stable at about $110,000 higher in the top decile compared to the bottom decile all through the 1976-to-1995 period, but grew thereafter, reaching $147,600 by 2004. This indicates that the increase in after-tax-income inequality is of significant absolute magnitude as well as relative magnitude.

Income polarization also rose over the 1990s. The share of Canadians with family after-tax income from 75% to 150% of the median after-tax income fell from 52.1% in 1989 to 47.3% in 2004, a drop of 4.8 percentage points. Closer inspection of the data reveals that the trend away from the middle class (defined by income) was both towards lower-income and higher-income persons. The share of persons with after-tax income below 75% of the median rose by 2.6 percentage points, while that share with income above 150% of the median rose by 2.0 percentage points.

The share of persons with adjusted income below one half of the 1979 level of adjusted family median income fell across the 1980s but rose in the 1990s, ending at 10.2% in 2004, which is slightly higher than it was in 1989.

There are several reasons to suspect that the role of the tax-transfer system in equalizing incomes may be different in the 2000s than in earlier decades. While the paper does not go in to these in great detail, we note that changes in social assistance and employment insurance eligibility and entitlement levels (these generally became more generous across the 1980s and then less across the 1990s), the introduction of new programs such as the Canada Child Tax Benefit and the Goods and Services Tax credit, as well as the maturation of the Canada Pension Plan and the Québec Pension Plan were important developments which may have affected the amount of income redistribution that is done through the transfer system. Moreover, increases in real tax rates across the 1980s, followed by their reduction in the 1990s, may have had implications for redistribution through the tax system.

This study shows that, after remaining stable for several decades, family after-tax-income inequality rose in the 1990s, settling at a higher level in the 2000s. At the same time, the share of middle-income families was reduced and the share of low- and high-income families grew larger. The absolute gap between bottom- and top-income families also increased in a substantive way, indicating that these increases in inequality have an important magnitude. These trends appear to have been driven by rising inequalities in income received from market sources (wages, salaries, self-employment income, private pensions and investment income) among families.

Perspectives on Labour and Income - September 2007

High-income Canadians

Brian Murphy, Paul Roberts and Michael Wolfson

Thresholds defined in nominal dollar terms are the
simplest. Absolute thresholds refer to a particular dollar
amount—for example, $100,000. Those with
incomes higher than a given figure are considered to
have high income.

Examples of commonly applied absolute nominal
thresholds include $250,000, the highest income
grouping used for many years by the Canada Revenue
Agency (CRA);2 $150,000, used in Statistics Canada’s
census tables; $100,000, used by the province of
Ontario in their ‘sunshine list’ made available under the
Public Sector Salary Disclosure Act (Campbell 1996); and
the threshold at which the top federal tax rate begins—
$113,804 in 2004.3

• In 2004, 5% of Canadian taxfilers had an income of $89,000 or more; only 1% reached $181,000 or more.
• In 2004, the top 5% of taxfilers received 25% of total income and paid 36% of income and payroll taxes.
• The prevalence of high income peaks in the 45-to-64 age group. In 2004, individuals of that age represented less than a third of all income recipients, but made up more than half of the top 5%.
• Calgary had the highest proportion of families with income over $250,000 in 2004, but Toronto had by far the most families with such incomes, almost one-third of the national total.
• Of the 1.2 million taxfilers who made up the top 5% of income recipients in 2004, three-quarters were men, even though men accounted for less than half of all taxfilers. However, since 1982 there has been an 11% increase in the portion of women in the top 5% of tax filers.

Average income and net worth

In 1999, the average income for the bottom 80% of families was $38,000 while their average net worth was about five times higher at $192,000. The top 1% had average income of $366,000 and average net worth of $1.9 million, also roughly five times income. It follows that both the average income and average wealth of the top 1% are about 10 times that of the bottom 80%. The implication is that some lower-income families have relatively high net worth (for example the elderly) while some high-income families have relatively low net worth (the young).

Not surprisingly, the importance of housing and vehicular assets declines as income increases. While houses and cars accounted for 31% of average net worth for the 80% of families with the lowest incomes, they accounted for only 16% for the top 1%. These top income families had 61% of their net worth in financial assets compared with 37% for the bottom 80%. Pension assets are far more evenly distributed—21% of net worth for the top 1% of families, 32% for the bottom 80%.

The ratio of taxes to total income rises with income. In 2004, the bottom 95% of the taxfiler population received 75% of income and paid 64% of taxes, while the top 5% received 25% of income and paid 36% of taxes.¹¹

A number of different tax rates can be examined. Nominal (statutory) tax rates are provided in legislation and are higher for higher incomes. The marginal tax rate applies to the last dollar of income. These rates are sensitive to the kind of income and the unit of analysis—individual or family. The effective tax rate (ETR) is simply the ratio of taxes paid to total income.

For the bottom 95%, ETRs generally increased through the 1980s, remained roughly constant at just over 15% throughout the 1990s, and declined at the turn of the millennium, remaining steady through 2004. More fluctuation was evident in the high-income population because of high-income surtaxes and numerous changes to top federal tax brackets. They had a more pronounced rise in the mid-to-late 1980s, declining more sharply in 1988 with the introduction of tax reform, which reduced 10 brackets to 3 and converted many deductions to tax credits.

Over 85% of the 5% of Canadians with the lowest incomes in 2004 paid no income or payroll taxes (Chart F). While some individuals may have no income taxes payable, Employment Insurance and Canada or Quebec Pension Plan contributions may still be payable.

The proportion paying no taxes drops sharply after the first vingtile but remains over 40% until the 35th percentile. It then drops quickly to below 1% approximately two-thirds of the way up the income distribution.

Some 5% of individual taxfilers had incomes of $89,000 or more in 2004. Regardless of the threshold used, incomes in the upper tail of the distribution as well as the share of total income increased substantially from 1992 to 2004. In contrast, individuals in the bottom 50% to 80% generally saw little improvement in constant dollar income.

Compared with the U.S., Canada had significantly fewer high-income recipients in 2004, and their incomes were considerably less. High-income Canadians increasingly receive more of their income from employment than from other sources.

Investment income has been a decreasing proportion, even among those with the highest incomes.

Income Instability of Lone Parents, Singles and Two-Parent Families in Canada, 1984 to 2004

This paper examines income instability of lone parents, singles and two-parent families in Canada in the past two decades using tax data. We attempt to answer the following questions: Has there been a widespread increase in earnings instability among lone parents (especially lone mothers) and unattached individuals over the past 20 years? How do the trends in earnings instability among lone parents and unattached individuals compare to the trends among the two-parent families? What is the role of government transfers and the progressive tax system in mitigating differences in earnings instability across different segments of the earnings distribution among the above-mentioned groups? We find little evidence of a widespread increase in earnings instability in the past two decades and show that government transfers play a particularly important role in reducing employment income instability of lone mothers and unattached individuals.

Similar to Morissette and Ostrovsky (2005), we find that earnings instability varies considerably with employment income and is much higher among families in the bottom tertile (one third of all families) than among families in the top tertile. The magnitude of these differences varies for different age groups and family categories; however, it is fair to say that for two-parent families the bottom–top earnings instability ratio is generally smaller mostly due to lower instability in the bottom tertile.

In all age groups, social assistance appears to be the single most important factor reducing income instability of lone mothers. For lone mothers, SA plays a much greater role in reducing income instability than for the two-parent families. In the youngest age group, for instance, it reduces instability in the bottom tertile by 32%. As social assistance has little effect on the lone mothers in the top tertile, this also results in the largest drop in the differences between bottom and top tertiles (23%). The impact of social assistance on instability is somewhat smaller for the 45-to-49 age group although it is still larger than the impact of any other factors.

Employment insurance also lowers income instability of lone mothers. In all age groups, it is the second most important factor mitigating instability among lone mothers in the bottom tertile. Overall, the reduction in instability (relative to market income) due to EI and SA in the bottom tertile varies between 32% and 48%.

The role of the progressive tax system has two different aspects. On the one hand, in all age groups, the instability of the after-tax income in the bottom tertile is lower than the instability of the total income although the reduction is 6% at most, and in some age groups it is close to zero. On the other hand, in some age groups the tax system has a larger effect in the top tertile, so the after-tax difference between bottom and top tertiles is actually larger for the after-tax income than for the before-tax income.

Personal debt — PDF

Personal consumption expenditure constitutes a larger share of GDP in the U.S.

Consumer spending is a key contributor to a country's economic health. Consumer spending as a percentage of GDP is much lower in Canada, ranging from 52.8% to 58.9% over the last 25 years, compared with 61.4% to 70.0% in the U.S. In other words, consumer spending has boosted the economy more in the U.S. than in Canada.

Canadians pay more income taxes and transfers to government

Even though both countries have a progressive income tax system, their marginal tax rates, methods of taxation, and allowable deductions vary considerably. In Canada, a relatively larger share of personal income goes for federal and provincial income taxes, Canada or Quebec Pension Plan contributions, and Employment Insurance premiums (17.3% in 1980 and 23.4% in 2005). Americans, on the other hand, paid 18.3% and 18.7% of their income for federal and state income taxes, social security contributions, and unemployment insurance.¹ The gap between total and disposable income has widened over time in Canada while remaining almost unchanged in the U.S. However, the mix of deductions in the U.S. has changed considerably: Income taxes accounted for 79.4% of deductions in 1980 compared with 57.7% in 2005..

Both Canadians and Americans have increased their debt-to-income ratios

Credit can be used to meet regular or unexpected consumption needs, or even to acquire assets. Debt load, measured by the ratio of total debt to disposable income was almost the same for Canadians and Americans at the beginning of the 1980s. After that, they parted ways: Americans had the greater debt load between 1983 and 1991 and Canadians between 1992 and 2000. From 2001, debt grew steadily in both countries and by 2002 had surpassed disposable income. By 2005, for each dollar of disposable income, Canadians owed $1.16 and Americans $1.24.

Some of the increased indebtedness between 2001 and 2005 may be attributed to relatively low rates of interest, easy credit through home equity loans, and increased limits and incentives on credit cards issued by competing financial institutions.

Canadians use more consumer credit for their personal spending

Between 1980 and 2005, consumer credit represented between 21 and 38 cents of each dollar of personal spending in Canada. In the U.S., the amount was between 19 and 27 cents. Since 1986, when the Reagan administration cancelled tax deductibility for interest paid on consumer loans, Americans have been using less of this kind of credit. Consequently, since 1988, the gap between the U.S. and Canada in the use of consumer credit has widened.

Non-homeowners in both countries, who have neither mortgage debt nor access to home-equity line of credit, can increase limits on their credit cards or use personal loans to finance unexpected needs or other budgetary shortfalls.

On a per-capita basis, consumption expenditure outpaced disposable income in both Canada and the U.S.

Over the 1980-to-2005 period, per capita consumption expenditure in Canada more than tripled from $6,870 to $23,560, while disposable income rose proportionally less—$8,390 to $24,400 (2.9 times). In the U.S., expenditures and disposable income rose more steeply—from CAN$8,770 to $37,980 (4.3 times) and from CAN$9,710 to $39,260 (4.0 times). The disparity between Canada and the U.S. in both per-capita spending and disposable income has increased and, as consumer spending has outgrown disposable income, both Canadians and Americans have had to finance their spending through credit.

In both countries, total household debt outgrew consumer spending as well as disposable income

In terms of aggregates in their respective currencies, household debt rose in Canada from $134 billion in 1980 to $916 billion by 2005 (6.8 times), and in the U.S. from $1.3 trillion to 11.2 trillion (8.6 times). Even though inflation was almost the same in both countries, consumer spending and disposable income increased less in Canada. Consumer spending, for instance, rose from $168 billion to $760 billion in Canada and from $1.8 trillion to $8.7 trillion in the U.S.

Young pensioners
Ted Wannell

• Although public retirement pensions cannot be collected until one's seventh decade (age 60 for the Canada and Quebec Pension Plans, and 65 for Old Age Security), many private pension plans allow long-serving employees in their 50s to draw benefits. Tax data indicate that about one-fifth of workers begin collecting benefits from such plans before their 60^th birthday.
• The pension take-up rate is very low (less than 1%) from ages 50 to 54. It spikes at age 55 (5% for men and 4% for women) as many plans commence unreduced benefits at this milestone, given sufficient tenure. This peak is not surpassed until workers exit their 50s.
• About half of young pensioners worked for pay the year after they began receiving their pension. However, much of that work was either part-time or intermittent since only 30% earned at least $5,000. Men were more likely than women to surpass the $5,000 benchmark (34% versus 26%).
• The probability of non-trivial re-employment falls as the age at retirement increases. Those who retired at 50 were almost twice as likely as those retiring at 59 to earn at least $5,000 in the following year.
• Very few young pensioners turn to self-employment as a significant source of income. Less than 1 in 10 earned some self-employment income, and 1 in 20 or less earned at least $5,000.
• Early pensioners generally retired from high-paying jobs. Their average earnings in the year before retirement were about 50% greater than those who did not retire. Among women, the post-retirement income of young pensioners exceeded the income of those who remained in the workforce.
• Young pensioners typically bring in about two-thirds of their pre-retirement income the year after they begin collecting their pension—very close to the 70% replacement rate recommended by many financial analysts. Pension income accounts for a greater proportion of the total income of women in this group (66% in 2004 compared with 61% for men).

The 2001 Census figures on income, released on Tuesday May 13, are telling us two very important stories. The first is that Canadian society is becoming increasingly polarized. The richest 10% of our population has seen its income grow by a whopping 14% while the bottom 10% has seen only a slight increase of less than 1%. Moreover the income of many working families has actually declined!

Overall, government transfers have decreased. Although Statistics Canada declined to reveal the dollar value of the decrease, they did provide analysis of the changing significance of government transfers to different income groups.

Among working age families, the proportion of total income represented by government transfers dropped over the decade, from 6.4% to 5.6%. This drop did not actually begin until after 1995, and it reversed a trend of growth in government transfers to working age Canadians which had been evident since 1980.

However, the proportion of income attributable to government transfers has increased throughout the 1990s for the 30% of families at the bottom end of the income distribution. The proportion of their income derived from government transfers increased from 58.4% to 62.2%. Transfers to the other 70% decreased over the decade.

Median total income, by family type, by province and territory
(All census families)

	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005
	All census families1
	$
Median total income
Canada	53,500	55,000	56,000	58,100	60,600
Newfoundland and Labrador	41,400	43,200	44,800	46,100	47,600
Prince Edward Island	46,900	48,600	49,600	51,300	53,400
Nova Scotia	46,900	48,600	50,000	51,500	54,000
New Brunswick	45,200	46,800	48,000	49,700	51,500
Quebec	49,700	51,600	52,600	54,400	57,000
Ontario	58,400	59,600	60,500	62,500	64,500
Manitoba	49,800	51,200	52,100	54,100	56,100
Saskatchewan	48,900	50,500	51,500	53,500	56,300
Alberta	59,900	61,700	63,000	66,400	71,000
British Columbia	51,700	52,800	53,600	55,900	58,500
Yukon Territory	61,000	63,900	64,300	67,800	71,700
Northwest Territories	70,300	76,000	76,400	79,800	83,900
Nunavut	44,800	48,100	47,900	49,900	52,300

Table 7
Incidence of Low Income: Various Groups, Canada
Market Basket Measure 2000, 2001, 2002
and LICOs-IAT 2002

	MBM-2000	MBM-2001	MBM-2002	LICOs-IAT 2002
All persons	14.8	13.6	13.7	11.6
Under 18 years of age	18.4	16.8	16.9	12.2
18-64	15.2	14.0	14.1	12.1
65 and over	5.8	5.5	5.6	7.6
Males	14.0	13.0	13.2	10.7
Under 18 years of age	18.2	16.9	17.7	12.7
18 to 64	13.9	12.9	13.0	11.0
65 and over	5.0	5.1	5.3	4.9
Females	15.6	14.2	14.1	12.4
Under 18 years of age	18.7	16.6	15.9	11.8
18 to 64	16.5	15.1	15.2	13.1
65 and over	6.5	5.8	5.9	9.7
All families	17.7	16.7	16.3	15.5
Economic families 2+	12.0	10.8	11.2	8.6
Elderly families	4.7	3.9	4.5	2.9
Elderly married couples	2.5	2.8	3.1	1.9
Other elderly families	12.9	8.2	10.0	6.9
Non-elderly families	13.2	11.9	12.3	9.5
Married couples	9.7	8.7	9.0	7.1
Two-parent families with children	11.9	10.6	9.8	6.5
Married couples with other relatives	5.8	6.3	7.1	5.0
Lone-parent families	38.4	37.3	41.1	34.2
Male lone-parent families	18.6	17.8	21.8	12.2
Female lone-parent families	42.5	41.4	45.6	39.4
Other non-elderly families	13.2	9.8	12.0	10.8
Unattached individuals	29.5	28.7	26.5	29.5
Male	28.6	28.4	26.2	27.1
Female	30.4	29.1	26.7	32.0
All Elderly	12.0	11.6	10.0	19.4
Elderly Male	14.2	13.9	11.8	15.9
Elderly Female	11.2	10.7	9.4	20.7
All Non-Elderly	35.8	34.8	32.5	33.2
Non-Elderly Male	31.0	30.8	28.7	29.0
Non-Elderly Female	42.3	40.3	37.6	39.0

• Two groups among the working age population - those commonly referred to as the "working poor" and five socio-demographic groups at disproportionate risk of persistent low income are featured in this report.
• The risk of experiencing annual and persistent low income for "working" families (those where the Major Income Recipient (MIR) works 910 hours or more for pay annually) is much lower than for families with weaker attachment to paid work. However, "working poor" families still accounted for almost 30% of all working-age low income families in 2002 and for just over 40% of low income children living in such families in that year.
• Regardless of the low income measure used, five socio-demographic groups have a disproportionate risk of persistent low income. Two out of the five high-risk groups - unattached individuals aged 45-64 and persons with work-limiting disabilities - significantly improved their incidence of low income between 2000 and 2002. Changes in the incidence of low income for the other three groups - lone parents with at least one child under 18, recent immigrants and Aboriginal Canadians living off-reserve during this period were not statistically significant.
• Between 2000 and 2002, the Market Basket Measure identified a somewhat larger low income population than is calculated using Statistics Canada's post-income tax Low Income Cut-offs (LICOs-IAT).
• This difference is more than accounted for by the more stringent definition of economic family disposable income which is compared to the MBM low
• income thresholds. Several more items are deducted from gross income using the MBM than the LICOs-IAT.

• These additional deductions from gross income are particularly important in increasing the incidence of low income for children (as deductions include out-of-pocket child care costs) and for working-age families with a strong attachment to paid work (as deductions include payroll taxes and other mandatory payroll deductions).

Taxation in Canada



Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
taxes, tax-cuts, tax-credit, budget, economy, government, Conservatives, Flaherty, Harper
Salaries, Canada, wages, Economy, politics, Jack Layton, Conservatives
Canada, Stephen Harper, Liberals, Dion, NDP,