Unpacking the Numbers Behind Canada’s Per-Worker Investment Gap and the Real Agenda Driving Conservative Narratives

Introduction

During a recent interview with Dr. Jordan Peterson, Pierre Poilievre described Canada’s per-worker investment gap as a damning indictment of the Liberal government. According to him, “Canadian workers get about 55 cents for every dollar of business investment in the U.S.” He framed this as evidence of Canada’s failing economy under Trudeau’s leadership, using it to call for tax cuts and deregulation. But let’s unpack that. Is this metric really a smoking gun? Or is it a clever misdirection aimed at convincing Canadians to support policies that don’t actually benefit them?

Spoiler alert: It’s the latter.

What Does Per-Worker Investment Actually Measure?

Per-worker investment refers to how much money businesses spend on tools, technology, and infrastructure for each employee. Poilievre cites this metric as proof that Canada is falling behind, but here’s the twist: higher investment doesn’t necessarily mean better outcomes for workers. In fact, as Dr. Peterson himself noted during the discussion, “This sounds like a bunch of wonk speak that might seem like it only matters to someone staring at a spreadsheet.”

The reality is that high per-worker investment often signals increased automation and corporate profits—not improved wages or working conditions for employees. In other words, it’s a number that benefits boardrooms, not breakrooms.

The Conservative Playbook: Misdirection and Big Numbers

Let’s call this what it is: a political tactic. Poilievre’s focus on per-worker investment is part of a broader strategy conservatives use globally to sell “pro-business” policies like tax cuts and deregulation. These policies are often framed as a way to create jobs and boost the economy. But as we’ve seen time and again, the real winners are corporations and their shareholders, not average workers.

Poilievre himself highlighted Canada’s “bureaucratic obstacles” and “high taxes” as barriers to investment. Yet, cutting these would mean:

• Weaker environmental protections.
• Reduced workplace safety standards.
• Fewer public services as government revenues shrink.

Peterson, whether knowingly or not, echoed this narrative, emphasizing how “Canada is losing capital to the U.S.” while largely ignoring how these investments impact everyday Canadians.

How Canada’s Approach Protects Workers

Canada’s policies—while not perfect—are designed to prioritize people over profits. For example:

• Universal Healthcare: In the U.S., companies spend heavily on health benefits, inflating their per-worker investment numbers. In Canada, that’s covered by the government.
• Environmental Standards: Projects may take longer to approve here, but this protects our natural resources and communities.
• Worker Protections: Canada enforces stricter labour laws, ensuring fair wages and safer conditions even if it raises business costs.

Poilievre might argue that these policies stifle business investment, but the alternative is a race to the bottom where corporate interests dominate at the expense of worker well-being.

The Real Problems Canadians Face

Peterson and Poilievre spent much of their interview lamenting Canada’s economic challenges, from the housing crisis to inflation. But their solutions—cutting taxes and regulations—would do little to solve these issues. Instead, they would:

• Widen the gap between the rich and the rest of us.
• Shift the tax burden from corporations to individuals.
• Undermine the very social supports Canadians rely on.

As Peterson admitted, “The richest people per capita in terms of GDP are in Ontario, and they’re now poorer per capita than inhabitants of Mississippi.” But what’s missing from this narrative is how systemic inequality and affordability issues—not per-worker investment—are the real culprits.

Why This Matters to You

When politicians like Poilievre fixate on statistics like the per-worker investment gap, they’re banking on the fact that most people won’t dig deeper. It’s a distraction, plain and simple. The real issues affecting Canadians—affordable housing, healthcare access, and fair wages—aren’t solved by giving corporations a bigger slice of the pie.

As Peterson aptly noted, “There’s a lot of distrust, generally speaking, in relationship to establishment organizations and political elites.” That distrust is real, but let’s be clear: focusing on per-worker investment is a sleight of hand designed to benefit those elites, not ordinary Canadians.

Key Takeaways:

• High per-worker investment isn’t a marker of success for workers—it often benefits corporations more than people.
• The Conservative narrative around this metric is a tactic to push policies that favour big businesses while eroding protections for the average Canadian.
• Canada’s focus on worker protections, universal healthcare, and environmental standards provides a more balanced approach, even if it comes at a cost.

Read Part 2, where we discuss the all-important Housing issues that face many Canadians. 

Share: