British Columbians are taking home 12.2 per cent more than they were 10 years ago.
Statistics Canada data released Wednesday suggests that incomes in the province rose by 12.2 per cent between 2005 and 2015.
The figures place B.C. residents’ earnings seventh in Canada, but still above the national rate of 10.8 per cent. The province’s median household income was $69,995, compared to $70,336 Canada-wide.
Jumps to median income varied wildly throughout the province. Dawson Creek saw a 31.6-per-cent increase, while Quesnel, Port Alberni and Powell River saw rises of less than two per cent. Median incomes went up 11.2 per cent in Vancouver.
Slightly more than 15 per cent of British Columbians remain under the low-income cutoff – a number that has barely changed in the past decade. Youth under 25 are the most likely to be in low-income families, from 18 per cent for kids up to four years old to 18.6 per cent for ages 15-19 and 19.8 per cent for those aged 20 to 24.
At 20.3 per cent, Port Alberni had the highest number of low-income earners. The greater Vancouver area sits at 16.5 per cent, in comparison, while Fort. St. John comes in the lowest with 7.3 per cent.
Among Lower Mainland cities, White Rock had the lowest increase in median incomes at 4.6 per cent. Vancouver and Mission were neck-and-neck for the highest increase, at 16.8 per cent and 16.5 per cent respectively.
Lower Mainland median incomes, 2015:
No surprise, the data suggests single-parent families were much more likely to be poor than two-parent families.
A single parent with three or more kids was 3.5 times more likely to live below the poverty line than a family with three or more kids but two parents. In general, 40.3 per cent of single-parent families were low-income, compared to just 11.9 per cent of two-parent families.
In comparison, 32.1 per cent of people living alone were below the low-income cutoff.
Correction: An earlier version of this story did not take into account that Statistics Canada figures are adjusted for inflation. The article above has been corrected to reflect the proper figures.