I Compared A $100K Salary In Canada vs America… It Wasn’t Even Close

Summary

The presenter compares the monthly finances of two hypothetical married, single-income households, each earning $100,000 in their local currency and supporting a stay-at-home spouse and two children: John in Ontario, Canada, and Luke in Florida, U.S. The comparison uses local costs and currencies rather than converting CAD to USD. The presenter argues that, under his assumptions, Florida’s lower housing costs leave substantially more room for household spending and investing, despite higher U.S. health-insurance costs.

Income and taxes

• John (Ontario): The video estimates annual take-home pay of $77,000 CAD, or $6,425/month, after federal and provincial income tax, CPP, and EI. It adds $670/month in Canadian Child Benefit, bringing the monthly budget to $7,095.
• Luke (Florida): The video estimates $89,000 USD/year, or $7,425/month, after federal tax, Social Security, and Medicare. Its assumptions include Florida’s 0% state income tax, a $32,200 joint deduction for 2026, and a $2,200 child tax credit.
• Before healthcare costs, Luke is ahead by about $330/month. After the assumed U.S. employee health-insurance cost, Canada briefly moves ahead.

Healthcare figures cited

The video budgets $0/month for John’s publicly funded healthcare and $571/month for Luke’s family health plan. It also contrasts access times, citing:

• Canada: 29 weeks on average to see a specialist, 8 months for an MRI, and an average Ontario ER wait of 14 hours.
• U.S.: 21 days to see a specialist, 3 days for an MRI, and an average Florida ER wait of 1 hour 41 minutes.
• It also claims family-doctor waits are about 16 weeks in the U.S., while finding a doctor in Florida can take days.

These are figures and characterizations presented by the speaker. The video acknowledges that U.S. healthcare is costly and is not universally fast or affordable.

Housing and monthly budget comparison

The housing comparison uses specific homes rather than currency conversion or direct exchange-rate adjustment:

Budget item John — Waterloo, Ontario (CAD) Luke — Lehigh Acres/Fort Myers, Florida (USD) Example home asking price $849,900 $295,000 Price relative to $100,000 salary 8.5× 2.95× 20% down payment $169,980 $59,000 Mortgage terms cited 4.1%, 25 years 6.76%, 30 years Monthly mortgage $3,620 $1,530 Monthly property tax / housing cost stated $465 tax + $150 insurance $650 property taxes/insurance Monthly housing total used $4,235 $2,180 Balance after housing $2,860 $4,674

The speaker says the Ontario property tax is just under $6,000/year. The Florida home is described as a three-bedroom, three-bathroom new build. The comparison uses the prices and financing assumptions stated in the video.

Other monthly expenses assumed:

• Food: John $1,500; Luke $1,150.
• Utilities, internet, and phones: John $650; Luke $525.
• Transportation: John $1,000; Luke $900.

After those expenses, the model leaves John with $710/month before clothing, entertainment, and other irregular costs. Luke has $2,099/month before savings and those discretionary costs. The speaker concludes that John’s modeled budget turns negative after transportation, while Luke retains a surplus.

Savings and investing scenario

The video applies a savings target of 10% of gross income, or about $833/month, invested by Luke but unaffordable for John in the example. After this contribution, Luke is left with about $1,266/month for other spending or reserves.

The investment illustration assumes Luke invests $833 monthly in the S&P 500, using SPY as the example, and earns an average annual return of 12%:

• Starting at age 37 and investing until 65: projected balance of about $2.25 million.
• If left invested until age 80: the video says it could grow to about $6 million.

These are hypothetical projections based on the stated return assumption, not guaranteed outcomes. The video does not detail inflation, taxes, fees, or investment volatility.

Broader argument and proposed changes

The presenter argues that the affordability gap is driven mainly by housing costs and taxes, rather than small differences in grocery or phone bills. He says Canada’s child benefits and publicly funded healthcare are meaningful advantages but do not, in his comparison, offset housing and tax pressures.

On housing, he attributes high construction costs partly to slow permitting, development costs, and financing delays. He says developers may face 8 months to a year waiting for approvals and cites business financing rates of 10–12%. His illustrative construction-cost breakdown includes roughly $150,000 in development costs, $30,000–$40,000 for drawings and related work, and $250,000–$300,000 to build, resulting in a basic new home costing roughly $800,000–$900,000 after costs and builder profit.

His proposed policy changes are to speed up permits, reduce development and construction costs, and lower taxes. He also suggests that remote workers earning $100,000 may find more affordable housing in lower-cost U.S. states; the video gives examples of homes around $120,000 in some locations.

The presenter says Canada had its largest-ever outflow of Canadians to the U.S. in the prior year, but provides no supporting figure in the subtitles. He invites a future comparison at $200,000 household income.

Assets, instruments, and sectors mentioned

• SPY and the S&P 500
• Residential real estate and mortgages
• Canadian and U.S. dollars (CAD/USD)
• Health-insurance plans
• Construction and housing development

Caveats and disclosures

• The comparison is a scenario using selected locations, example home listings, and stated assumptions; it does not convert the salaries into a common currency or claim to measure every household’s circumstances.
• The presenter says the comparison includes advantages and disadvantages for both countries, but the results depend on the chosen homes, taxes, insurance, family benefits, and expense estimates.
• No explicit “not financial advice” disclaimer appears in the subtitles.

Presenter and sources

Presenter: Mat Piche.

Sources cited in the video: A 2025 Fraser Institute study on Canadian healthcare wait times and an AMN healthcare study. The video also uses tax assumptions, housing listings, and cost estimates presented by the creator. John and Luke are illustrative household examples.