deceptive politics

Seen in the free “newspaper” Europe and You, Jan/Feb 2106:

[While being in the EU costs each household less than a pound a day,
independent experts estimate the benefits are worth £3,000 a year to
the average household, due to lower prices and more jobs, trade and investment.
Source: CBI, Office for National Statistics]

This is one of “six key facts” picked to encourage people to vote to stay in the EU.  I’m almost certainly going to vote to stay in, yet this statement riled me.

This style of presentation is an example of a blatantly deceptive practice, of not comparing like with like.  Here the cost is given in pounds per day, the benefits in pounds per year. Compare:

1. Deceptive pro (above): While being in the EU costs each household less than a pound a day, independent experts estimate the benefits are worth £3,000 a year to the average household. 
2. Deceptive anti: While being in the EU costs each household about £300 a year, independent experts estimate the benefits are worth less than £10 a day to the average household. 
3. Per day: While being in the EU costs each household less than a pound a day, independent experts estimate the benefits are worth about £10 a day to the average household. 
4. Per year: While being in the EU costs each household about £300 a year, independent experts estimate the benefits are worth £3,000 a year to the average household. 

(I’ve been approximate with the roundings, as I don’t have the exact numbers to hand.)

I grant that the original statement not as dishonest (or possibly merely innumerate) as those comparisons that say “X has gone up by amount a, whereas Y has increased by b%”, because those give no opportunity to even work out whether a or b% is bigger.  But it’s still deceptive, putting “cost is less than a pound, benefit is £3,000” in the readers’ heads, and forcing them to do the arithmetic before they can compare like with like.

Even with the reworking, I’m not convinced (3) and (4) are even now comparing like with like.  Note the “each household” in the first part, compared to “the average household” in the second part.  What distinction is being drawn here?