Essays /

Canada U S Unemployment Rates Why Canada S So High Essay

Essay preview

this is an amzing essay excellent work-now take on the critics!!

For decades prior to the 1981-82 recession, the national unemployment rates of Canada and the United States had been nearly identical. Since then, a persistent 'unemployment rate gap' has emerged. Throughout most of the 1980s, Canada's unemployment rate has consistently been about 2 percentage points higher than in the United States. The gap developed in spite of very similar economic performances across the two countries: the growth rate of real per capita incomes has been virtually identical since 1976. However, now, well into the 90s, the gap has widened much more significantly. In the last five years, the United States average has actually fallen from 6.7% to 6.5%, with a current rate of 5.2%, while the Canadian rate has and still remains at 9.4%, with a current rate of 9.7%. This substantial difference in Canada's unemployment rate can be attributed mostly to the safety net which the government provides, including generous payments of unemployment insurance and other social services; but also to the high payroll taxes; and the under performing Canadian economy. There is no single reason for the persistent gap in the unemployment rates of Canada and the U.S., but rather a combination of the above factors.

'No society can be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable.' (Adam Smith) This is the theory behind the creation of social services such as unemployment insurance and welfare payments in many countries. The Canadian government provides a substantial 'social safety net' for its population. At first, this seems like a fair and proper thing to do, as it is in the best interests of society as a whole. However, when this generosity is taken advantage of by undeserving recipients, problems and controversy arise. The problem of abuse of Canadian social services has become prominent in 1996. The general consensus of organizations such as the Fraser Institute and the OECD, is that Canada's generous social safety net is a disincentive to work, which leads to dependence on the government, thus resulting in increased unemployment. By comparing the social benefits provided for Canadians and Americans, the cause of this gap in the unemployment rate becomes apparent.

In general, the social benefits provided for Canadians are incredibly generous, and unregulated in comparison to those of the U.S., resulting in a dependency on them and creating a disincentive to work. Unemployment insurance is a means of protecting workers who are out of work and looking for employment. The unemployed workers receive cash payments, usually each week for a limited period of time. Unemployment insurance is financed by the combination of employer and employee contributions, of which the employer contribution (a form of payroll tax) is slightly higher. Canada currently spends 70% as much on U.I. as the United States, in spite of the fact that the total U.S. labour force is about 11 times the size of Canada's. There are two principal differences between the two U.I. systems. The first is that unemployment insurance is operated at a state level in the United States. This means that the states administer the insurance system and determine the benefits, while maintaining certain standards according to federal law. The second is that in most cases the insurance premium employers must pay is related to the extent to which their employees use the system. In other words, there is an explicit insurance, or experience rating feature built into the U.S. system. In Canada the opposite occurs, with no penalty for employers who overuse the system. Unemployment insurance is regulated by the federal government, it applies in all provinces and territories, and covers about 97% of all Canadian workers. Due to the differences between the two systems, one can understand how Canadians h...

Read more

Keywords

-82 0.32 0.75 0.9 000 1 10 11 1976 1980 1980s 1981 1985 1990 1990s 1992 1994 1995 1996 2 26 3 3.3 30 32 330 460 5.2 5.25 5.4 50 53 6.35 6.5 6.7 70 8 854 9.4 9.7 90s 97 abl absolut abus access accord account accustom achiev across act action activ actual adam administ advantag advers affect aggrav aggreg almost alreadi also although american amount ampl amz anoth anyon appar appli appropri argu aris assist assum attract attribut avail averag away b.c back band base becom behind benefit best biggest billion boom bring built busi call canada canada/u.s canadian capac capita case cash caus cdn certain chang check children circumst claim clear client close collect combin come communiti compani compar comparison compel compens compon concern conclud condit confid consensus consist consolid consum contracept contract contrast contribut controversi corpor cost could couldn council countri cover creat creation critic current cut date dealt decad declin decreas deduct deficit defin demand depend desir destroy determin develop differ difficult direct disagre discourag disincent display distribut dollar domest dominion done downsiz downturn drag dramat drop due earli earn easier econom economi educ effect effici eight elig emerg employ employe enabl encourag enforc enough enrol entitl envious equal essay essenc even everi evid excel except execut exist experi experienc explain explan explicit extent face fact factor fail fair fallen famili far fast favour fazil fear featur feder fell figur financ find first fiscal five fix flourish follow forc form fraser fruit full full-tim fulli gain gap gdp general generat generos generous get give go goal goe good govern greater gross grow growth half happen happi hard he/she help high higher highest him/her hire his/her hit household howev ident impact implement import impos incent includ incom increas incred increment individu industri ineffect inexperienc initi institut instrument insur interest invest job keep killer known labour lack larg last law lay lead learn leav lengthi less lessen lesser level levi like likelihood limit link live long long-term longer look low lower lowest made maintain major make manag mani market marriag maximum may mean meant measur member metropolitan mihlar minimum miser mix money most much must nation near necessari need negat net new notabl noteworthi noth number oblig obstacl obtain obvious occur octob oecd off offer one ontario oper oppos opposit option organ origin other output overus pace paid parent part particular past paul pay payment payrol penalti pension peopl per percentag perform period perman perpetu persist person phenomenon plan point polici poll poor popul posit possibl premium present princip prior privat probabl problem produc product profit program promin proper protect prove proven provid provinc provinci public qualifi question quit rais rapid rate rather rbc real realiz reason receiv recent recess recipi recogn reconsid recoveri redistribut redistributionist reduc reduct refer regard regul rein relat reluct remain remov report requir resist resourc respons result return reveal revenu rise risen root rule run safeti save second sector secur seek seem self self-suffici serv servic set settl sever share short show shrank signific similar simpli sinc singl size skill slight slow sluggish smith social societi sole sole-support sometim somewhat specif specul spend spite spring standard state stay steadili stealth steep still stop storer stricter strike studi subsidi substanti success suffici suppli support system take taken tax taxat term territori theori therebi therefor thing think three throughout thus tie time toll took toronto total toward translat trap trend tri two type u u.i u.s unabl uncertain undemocrat underperform understand undertaken undeserv unemploy unit unless unregul upon use usual vari view violat virtual wage way wealth week welfar well wherea whole whose widen without word work work-now worker would year young