That had me wondering about just how representative it was. People have complained about a phenomena where we misjudge how representative groups are. For example, if everyone expects the group to be dominated by men, but the genders are actually 50-50, people will think of it as over-representing women, because there are more women than expected.
With that in mind, I looked up some of the statistics for this cabinet and for Canada as a whole. At least I think these are accurate statistics; it seems someone has cancelled the long-form census.
Group | Cabinet | Canada |
People from Greater Toronto | 23.3% | 16.3% |
Quebeckers | 20.0% | 23.61% |
Ontarians | 36.7% | 38.4% |
Albertans | 6.7% | 10.9% |
Nunavummiut** | 3.3% | 0.09% |
Sikhs | 10.0% | 1.4% |
Aboriginals | 6.7% | 4.3% |
Men | 50% | 49.0% |
Women | 50% | 51.0% |
People with physical disabilities* | 6.7% | 13.7% |
African-Canadians | 0% | 2.9% |
Visible minorities*** | 16.7% | 16.2% |
LGBT* | 3.3% | 5% |
Astronauts | 3.3% | 0.000026% |
* as far as I know | ||
** people from Nunavut | ||
*** Did you know that First Nations aren't considered "Visible Minorities"? |
So it's not perfect, but it is surprisingly close. Except for Sikhs, who are statistically way over-represented; not sure how that happened. Commence "Sikhs are taking over" paranoia in 3, 2, 1...
No comments:
Post a Comment