Wednesday, March 23, 2011

Graphs Tell Stories

From the PBO report today, a picture of out of control F-35 costs. Ouch:

Conservatives might dispute the above, but UNFORTUNATELY another third party validation "expert" is on side with Page's conclusions.

A nice illustration of government priorities



Skinny Dipper said...

I like listening to Con radio-jockeys when they say now is not the time to have an election during an "economic recovery." What about fixed election dates that Harper so espouses? We could still be in an economic recovery when we are supposed to have our fixed election. Does that mean that we have to wait until Canada has fully recovered economically? When do we have our election? Two and a half years after the previous one? Three? Four? Five? Six? Never?

WhigWag said...

Phone in and tell the shock jocks the Canadian recession ended in Fall 2009!

"The standard benchmark for a recession in Canada is two straight quarters of declining gross domestic product. This happened for three quarters in a row before growth resumed in the third quarter of 2009."

Steve V said...

They had the radio guys on CTV PowerPlay. My goodness, do you have to take an unhappy, grouch test to get on the air? Just bitter, nothing constructive, people that you never want your children to turn out like. Rutherford is a disaster of a human being. Maybe that's the appeal...

Jerry Prager said...

these are some of my 'favourite'flow charts

take Harper's multi-hundred million dollar propaganda budget, including the last installment of the Action Plan Adscam payments (24-26 million) pour into the top of the pyramids, and visualize the trickle down to all the editors and journalists and columnists throughout the PMO largest spin cycle in Canadian history, and the teflon nature of Harper's reign becomes apparent.

Jerry Prager said...

More of a chart than a graphic, but
CANADA Median Income Share% All families (2005 $) Median Wealth
1984 1999 2005
1 Top 10% 534,980 723,590,194,000 Top 10% 51.8 55.7
2 Ninth 256,740 344,890 413,750 Ninth 17.5 17.4
3 Eighth 170,210 221,770 263,000 Eighth 11.5 11
4 Seventh 120,690 148,610 173,590 Seventh 8.2 7.4
5 Sixth 83,130 93,850 109,050 Sixth 5.6 4.7
6 Fifth 52,260 57,120 63,250 Fifth 3.5 2.8
7 Fourth 24,630 26,150 25,500 Fourth 1.7% 1.3%
8 Third 7,770 6,820 6,000 Third 0.5 0.4%
9 Second 780 120 10 Second 0.10%
10 Bottom 1still -2100 -6570 -9,600 Bottom 10% -0.5 -0.
The rich get richer, the poor get poorer, and the wannabe wealthy sell out everyone they can.

Jerry Prager said...

This is a graph though

Kirk said...

Jerry, do you have a link for the original source for that data? It would be more helpful than the doc built from other sources.


Jerry Prager said...

Kirk, forgot where I found it, but google searched one of the lines and I believe this is the source

from the same site
"As numerous studies have shown (for example, Davies
1979 and 1993), wealth is highly concentrated. In 1984,
families in the top 10% of the wealth distribution held
52% of aggregate household wealth whereas the bottom 50% held only 5% (Table 1).
increased from 1984 to 1999 and again from 1999 to
2005, as the top 10% of families came to own 56% of
Canadians’ net worth in 1999, and 58% in 2005.
the 1984-to-2005 period, only families in the top 10%
increased their share of total wealth.
Meanwhile, median net worth stagnated or fell in the
bottom 40% of the distribution but rose substantially
in the top 40%. For instance, median net worth fell by
roughly $7,500 (in 2005 dollars) in the lowest 10% over
the 1984-to-2005 period, while increasing by between
$237,000 and $659,000 (depending on the sample considered) in the highest 10%. Hence, wealth inequality
rose as not all segments of the Canadian population
enjoyed wealth increases"

Jerry Prager said...

I'd say figures like those are one reason the Harper Government wanted to get rid of Stats Can, can't have the Canadian people know they are being slowly bled dry by the rich. Love that stat "families in the top 10% of the wealth distribution held
52% of aggregate household wealth whereas the bottom 50% held only 5%'