Maybe Canada’s peak opportunity for young adults really was in the 70s and 80s? Statistics Canada (StatCan) data shows the median income didn’t budge at all in 2024 after inflation. Since peaking in 2021, the median income hasn’t made much progress after inflation—except for older Canadians. While older demographics continue to see their real (inflation-adjusted) incomes hit new highs, younger ones saw their incomes peak nearly half a century ago. Seriously.
Canadian Median Incomes Stagnated
The change in income for the median Canadian in 2024, by age group, inflation-adjusted to 2024 constant dollars.
Source: StatCan; Better Dwelling.
The median worker in Canada earned $46,300 in 2024, unchanged in real terms from a year before. Hopefully those inflation numbers are right, eh? While the median worker didn’t see their income erode over this period, age made a big difference.
Canada’s younger workers actually saw a regression. Those 15 to 24-year-olds saw their income fall 1.9% in real terms in 2024, failing to meet inflation. It was an even worse year for those 25 to 34-year-olds (-2.4%), which is somewhat surprising. Not to sound like a broken record, keep in mind this excludes those who made zero. This is a data skew called statistical survivorship: Higher unemployment boosts the numbers, as lower-wage earners drop to zero and are removed from the pool.
There was no rollback for the other half. Workers aged 35 to 44 (+0.8%) beat inflation slightly, but posted less than half the gains of those 45 to 54-year-olds (+2.0%), 55 to 64-year-olds (+1.9%), and 65+ (+1.8%).
Median Canadian Income Peaked In 2021—Unless You’re Older
The percent change in the median real income of a Canadian worker since the 2021 peak, by age group, using 2024 constant dollars.
Source: StatCan; Better Dwelling.
Since 2021, the median income of everyone (15+) has slipped 1.3%, failing to meet inflation. That would be a dream for young adults, considering 15 to 24-year-olds (-16.5%) and 25 to 34-year-olds (-6.9%) saw much bigger contractions. Heck, even those 35 to 44-year-olds (-2.0%) were slightly worse off since 2021.
Declines were the norm, just not for older Canadians. The biggest winners since 2021 were workers aged 45 to 54 (+4.6%), who more than tripled the gains of those 55 to 64 (+1.3%). Their only challenger was, um, those 65+ (+3.7%) who were really just being held back by their peak earning years, apparently.
If you’re sensing a long-term trend, you’re onto something. But you’re still going to be shocked.
Canadian Seniors Have Seen Incomes Grow 15x Faster Than Average
The percent change in the median real income of a Canadian worker between 1976 and 2024, by age group, using 2024 constant dollars.
Source: StatCan; Better Dwelling.
Since 1976, the first year available, the median Canadian 15 years and older has seen their income rise a modest 9.2% after inflation. That works out to a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 0.18% over the 48 years. Again, hopefully they hit those inflation numbers with 100% precision. It doesn’t take a lot to roll those numbers back entirely, meaning reality is worse.
Canada’s young adults may find that hard to believe. Over those 48 years, real incomes have failed to keep up for 15 to 24-year-olds (-24%), who saw their incomes peak in 1977. It was a little better for those 25 to 34-year-olds (-7%), but it probably hasn’t been the same since their incomes peaked in 1976—the first year of the data.
Considering how wide this span has been, even the positive data points seem paltry for 35 to 44-year-olds (+5%). Even 45 to 54-year-olds (+19%) only beat inflation by a fraction of a point per year on average. Those 55 to 64-year-olds (+27%) did much better, but they saw just a fifth of the growth of those 65+ (+135%). That’s right, Canada’s golden class saw their income grow 15x more than the median worker.
Now the lesson here isn’t that older Canadians have seen their incomes explode. Honestly, it should be good news. The problem is the other end of the data, where young adults are actually poorer than they were 50 years ago. This issue compounds along with the credit expansion to amplify not just a housing crisis, but a demographic crisis. Housing was cheap when first-time buyers were making more. Now the same age group is making less, and today’s buyers are forced to wait until their mid-life peak earning years just to get a start.
That graph by age group with constant 2024 dollars requires people to consider that only Gen X was alive for the entire graph (likely). Those 15-24 today were not around prior to 2000 so these are points in time. That being said the data lacks comparison to the earlier graph that has the old filling up there pockets compared to the young. The presentation of the data may not have been intended to skew a perspective but I think it may have.
Well I started work in 1977, as an electrical appearance. I cleared 268.00 dollars for 80 hrs work. My salary went up 20 cents every 6 mths so long as I scored higher than 85% on work and class assignments.
My rent was 275.00 a month + utilities. Cheapest Calgary rent found in 1977. So rent and electricity was 60% of my income. No car, no phone, no cable TV.
Is it really any different today ? I would say yes as the young people I know have cell phones, cars … a journeyman electrician was maybe earning 19.00 an hour by 1989. The only reason we got a house was the real estate crash in 1984/5 hundreds of people lost their homes to 14% interest rates in Calgary. There were foreclosure trailers all over Calgary, filled with neighbourhood listings that people walked away from.
Now Iam 67 years old, retired, fixed income for the rest of my life and I read something like this. How rich I am, how easy it was. It took a Lifetime of work, 46 years of work, to retirement. Over that time my wife and I, who was a nurse and worked for 30 years, made enough to raise our two kids and live in older fix em up homes.
So what’s my point ? It takes a lifetime to get better things, or to just hold on to what you settled on and as far as incomes increasing after 65, all BS. There are no increases for the rest of our lives, just expenses. Our parents died broke, the cost of healthcare for dementia and cancer wiped them out. Not sure who has those trillions oh inharentence dollars but I know we aren’t getting anything.
Good point re data also re housing keep in mind boomers were the generation where women joined the workforce en mass because it took two incomes to afford a home versus immediately after the war when the governments went all in on funding. So the price of housing has been rising steadily over time
Are wages it would depend as well what career is with but more critically the impact of unionization and it’s fading so don’t try a prof kershaw bae game re generational squeeze to flip the blame to seniors or elders so unions had a huge role in improving living standards and even benefits available. Amd re the financialization of housing perhaps some of the incentive came because aside from marketing this for some replaced the no longer existing defined employee pension plans. So perhaps look at the role unions played and how unions have been fading rather than just age contingent plus hyper focus on cost efficiency and that would also impact salaries and also career advancement this can take time. And for sure A.I. will play a role in lowering wages for certain jobs. And maybe subsequent generations didn’t really appreciate or understand the value that unions brought to improve their jobs and salaries the union work didn’t happen over night but took decades
Data is not the be all to end all: just talk to or engage with younger people or anyone else who have trouble and they will tell you they can’t keep up. Wages, rent, the cost of food, gas, and everything else, there is not much left before becoming homeless in a blink of an eye. It seems “they” (the corporate entities and political leaders) want our last nickel before they assign us to “not worth their attention” as we fall off the conveyor belt into poverty. No wonder people find no purpose to life and go completely nuts, commit crimes, or commit suicide, because there is no reason to continue if they can’t see any way to improve their life that is out of their control.
In the 60s and 70s most youth would have casual part time jobs from age 13 or 14, and by 16 would be getting a pay stub for a ‘real’ part-time job, and reporting income. For many that was what paid for clothing and other necessary items, extra-curricular activities, as well providing spending money.
As a large boom population of youth, there was fierce competition for almost any job, so you were glad to get work, and were willing to work very hard to move up the ladder even a bit. Maybe that was a factor in higher relative wages for youth, and beyond, during that time.
I also would expect that many more young men than now were already making good wages in the trades by the age of 18 or younger, as many of my peers were. It’s true that many jobs in areas like forestry, fishing and manufacturing have disappeared, and most trades require more in-depth training, but they don’t yet seem to have a robot to do the home repairs and garden maintenance we need, so people are needed. Yet I hear many say that they don’t want to work in a manual job, while we are short of people with these very skills.