Annual Income: See how you compare to others

[stinkynuts]

Total income explorer, 2016 Census

This interactive chart shows percentiles of total income by various categories. A reference line can be added to the chart by entering a dollar amount. Data views are available for age, provinces or territories, census years (1985 to 2015) or metropolitan areas.

www12.statcan.gc.ca

How do you fare compared to others your age?

 

[_oh_johnny_]

I am off the charts.

 

[stinkynuts]

I am off the charts.

That could be either really good or bad.

 

[anon1]

there's no negative?

 

[Wanderer09]

Total income explorer, 2016 Census

This interactive chart shows percentiles of total income by various categories. A reference line can be added to the chart by entering a dollar amount. Data views are available for age, provinces or territories, census years (1985 to 2015) or metropolitan areas.

www12.statcan.gc.ca

How do you fare compared to others your age?

Given there are quite a few members here who like to use the words "I probably make much more than you" in every argument that happens with another member I think quite a few of the members on this board are in 99th percentile or above.

 

[lessjamie7]

Total income explorer, 2016 Census

This interactive chart shows percentiles of total income by various categories. A reference line can be added to the chart by entering a dollar amount. Data views are available for age, provinces or territories, census years (1985 to 2015) or metropolitan areas.

www12.statcan.gc.ca

How do you fare compared to others your age?

I know some people who are so poor all they have is money.

LJ

 

[wazup]

I live very comfortably thank you, although it's not that safe here in El Salvador.

 

[stinkynuts]

there's no negative?

this data includes only those who have earn a postive income, so no zero or negative incomes

 

[WetSeeker]

Interesting chart - once you are in the top 95% there is a huge variance in income to the 99% - proves that the gap is really huge for the ultra wealthy

 

[Uniforms Please]

Nic

Interesting chart - once you are in the top 95% there is a huge variance in income to the 99% - proves that the gap is really huge for the ultra wealthy

Nice to be in high 90%.

 

[oakvilleguy]

I’d say most often than not, many people working in Toronto would be in the 95th percentile and up, including policemen, firefighters etc. To get to 99%, is a big jump, but not impossible if you are a professional.

keep in mind, this does not include those whose income is strictly capital gains based or includes income from TFSA accounts. If you have a large enough portfolio and can generate say $500k in capital gains, that isn’t included as the numbers are based on the definition of “recurring” income.

 

[oakvilleguy]

Interesting chart - once you are in the top 95% there is a huge variance in income to the 99% - proves that the gap is really huge for the ultra wealthy

and the gap is exponential for those who are 99% vs the 99.9%

 

[Mr.Know-It-All]

I’d say most often than not, many people working in Toronto would be in the 95th percentile and up, including policemen, firefighters etc. To get to 99%, is a big jump, but not impossible if you are a professional.

keep in mind, this does not include those whose income is strictly capital gains based or includes income from TFSA accounts. If you have a large enough portfolio and can generate say $500k in capital gains, that isn’t included as the numbers are based on the definition of “recurring” income.

Most people in Toronto don't fall into the 95th percentile. https://www03.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/hmip-...atistics&SearchTags[1].Value=AverageAndMedian

Those are household stats... individual stats are worse.

 

[oakvilleguy]

Most people in Toronto don't fall into the 95th percentile. https://www03.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/hmip-pimh/en/TableMapChart/TableMatchingCriteria?GeographyType=MetropolitanMajorArea&GeographyId=2270&CategoryLevel1=Population, Households and Housing Stock&CategoryLevel2=Household Income&ColumnField=HouseholdIncomeRange&RowField=SurveyZone&SearchTags[0].Key=Households&SearchTags[0].Value=Number&SearchTags[1].Key=Statistics&SearchTags[1].Value=AverageAndMedian

Those are household stats... individual stats are worse.

Yes you are right. I guess most people I know just happen to fall into the 95th to 99th percentile.

 

[Wanderer09]

and the gap is exponential for those who are 99% vs the 99.9%

The wealth distribution follows the 80-20 rule. 20% of the people make 80% of the money. And within that 20% also the 80-20 rule would apply. So top 1% account for approximately 64% of wealth. And top 0.1-0.2% would account for about 50% of wealth. So wealth gap will increase a lot from 99% to 99.9%.

 

[fall]

The wealth distribution follows the 80-20 rule. 20% of the people make 80% of the money. And within that 20% also the 80-20 rule would apply. So top 1% account for approximately 64% of wealth. And top 0.1-0.2% would account for about 50% of wealth. So wealth gap will increase a lot from 99% to 99.9%.

you realise it was the graph for income, not wealth, right?

 

[Wanderer09]

you realise it was the graph for income, not wealth, right?

Yep I do. But assumption is income leads to wealth. And 80-20 rule would largely apply to income as well.

 

[_oh_johnny_]

That could be either really good or bad.

It is good!

 

[fall]

Yep I do. But assumption is income leads to wealth. And 80-20 rule would largely apply to income as well.

Yep, by the same logic there is a correlation between income and intellectual ability, so, poor people are, on average, dumb.

 

[jeff2]

Most people in Toronto don't fall into the 95th percentile. https://www03.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/hmip-pimh/en/TableMapChart/TableMatchingCriteria?GeographyType=MetropolitanMajorArea&GeographyId=2270&CategoryLevel1=Population, Households and Housing Stock&CategoryLevel2=Household Income&ColumnField=HouseholdIncomeRange&RowField=SurveyZone&SearchTags[0].Key=Households&SearchTags[0].Value=Number&SearchTags[1].Key=Statistics&SearchTags[1].Value=AverageAndMedian

Those are household stats... individual stats are worse.

Take a look at the stats for young men. Wages were higher in 1977. At every stage of their careers, men have been earning less than their fathers(when the father was the same age)

2 Background
To provide some context, Chart 1 shows the evolution of the median real annual wages and salaries of men aged 25 to 34 and those aged 35 to 44 over the 1965-to-2015 period.Note7 After experiencing robust wage growth from the mid-1960s to the late 1970s, both groups of men saw their median wages fall from the early 1980s to the mid-1990s. The net result was that by 2015, median wages of men aged 25 to 34 were substantially lower than those of their counterparts of the same age in 1977. In contrast, the growth in earnings that men aged 35 to 44 experienced from the mid-1990s onwards brought back their earnings in 2015 to levels similar to the peaks observed in the late 1970s.

Because of changes in their occupational profile and movements towards full-time employment, women aged 25 to 34 and those aged 35 to 44 did not experience the same wage patterns. The median wages of women aged 35 to 44 grew steadily (Chart 2). By 2015, they earned more than twice as much as their counterparts did in the mid-1960s. Median wages of women aged 25 to 34 grew rapidly from the mid-1960s to the late 1970s but stagnated up until the late 1990s. They started rising again after 1997.

Data table for Chart 1