Alberta cancels education grant after a decade

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
Alberta cancels education grant after a decade

WATCH ABOVE: The PC government cancelled a grant program for children who opened a RESP. Kendra Slugoski explains.

EDMONTON — It was supposed to be a way for parents to kick-start saving for their child’s college or university education. But, as of April 1, the Alberta Centennial Education Savings Plan has been cancelled.

The provincial grant program was created in 2005.

Global News
Any child born between Jan. 1, 2005 and March 31, 2015 was eligible for $500 as long as that child was signed up for a Registered Education Savings Plan. But, if your child was born one day later, on April 1, 2015, you’re out of luck.

“We understand there’s fiscal pressures within the province. We understand the financial realities that Alberta is dealing with right now,” said Peter Lewis with C.S.T. Consultants Inc.

“But we felt … you could find ways to restructure this program if it wasn’t meeting the specific public policy objectives of the government.”

Lewis lobbied for the creation of the education grant. Now he’s worried without it, parents might defer crucial contributions.

“Every day you delay savings is another day you don’t have the ability to have compound growth in your RESP,” he explained.

The $500 grant was an incentive to start that post-secondary education saving early. Over the span of 11 years, the province would top up that investment with another $300 ($100 payments when the child turned eight, 11 and 14).

WATCH: Alberta group calls for additional post-secondary funding

Since it started, the Alberta government has paid out $400,000, padding education funds for more than 280,000 students.

Despite those numbers, the province said the program was not effective.

“What we found is, five years after the program was introduced, the participation in RESPs was actually reduced by two per cent,” said Don Scott, minister of Innovation and Advanced Education.

“So what we’re doing is we’re targeting the money in better ways.”

If your child was born between Jan. 1, 2005 and March 31, 2015, you have until the end of July to register for the savings plan.

READ MORE: Are you saving enough for your child’s post-secondary education?

In 2014, the average cost of tuition at a Canadian university was nearly $6,000 a year.

© Shaw Media, 2015

Report an error

Alberta cancels education grant after a decade | Globalnews.ca
 

Cannuck

Time Out
Feb 2, 2006
30,245
99
48
Alberta
Smart move. The little f?#kers can't vote so if you're going to cut spending, it's a great place to start.
 

Cannuck

Time Out
Feb 2, 2006
30,245
99
48
Alberta
How terrible, making people responsible for their own financial well being.

Stop being so silly. If we actually wanted people to be responsible for their own financial well being, we'd eliminate public education all together.
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
55,639
7,099
113
Washington DC
Nothing wrong with public subsidized education but it does not have to be delivered by government employees.
I've been wondering how you feel about that. Now I know. You have no problem with the forced transfer of wealth from one person to another, you just want it done by contractors on cost-plus contracts.

NOW I gotcha.

Nobody asked for your lack of opinion. Go back to sorting beer cans.
Wow, you really hate people who work, don't you?
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,337
113
Vancouver Island
I've been wondering how you feel about that. Now I know. You have no problem with the forced transfer of wealth from one person to another, you just want it done by contractors on cost-plus contracts.

NOW I gotcha.


Wow, you really hate people who work, don't you?

Contractors can do most jobs much more efficiently than government. It would give parents a much better selection of schools instead of being forced to the one controlled by the teachers union.
 

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
3
36
London, Ontario
That's not what the thread is about. Thanks for trying though.

Pretty sure we already had the conversation about where it's not your place to determine what's "off topic" and "derailing". Just because you're not using the specific words and trying to be all subtle about it, doesn't mean it doesn't get noticed.

It does.

I've been wondering how you feel about that. Now I know. You have no problem with the forced transfer of wealth from one person to another, you just want it done by contractors on cost-plus contracts.

NOW I gotcha.

There you go extrapolating again.

For something you don't do, seems you do it a lot.
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
55,639
7,099
113
Washington DC
Contractors can do most jobs much more efficiently than government.
I'd provide you with statistics and analyses that prove otherwise, but it would move you not an inch (25.4 mm for Canadians), so why bother?

I actually used to think the same thing, until I learned the facts about government contracting.

It would give parents a much better selection of schools instead of being forced to the one controlled by the teachers union.
You really, REALLY hate people who work, don't you? I've never heard you express anything but contempt for the notion of working a job for wages.
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,337
113
Vancouver Island
I'd provide you with statistics and analyses that prove otherwise, but it would move you not an inch (25.4 mm for Canadians), so why bother?

I actually used to think the same thing, until I learned the facts about government contracting.


You really, REALLY hate people who work, don't you? I've never heard you express anything but contempt for the notion of working a job for wages.

If government employees can do the job more efficiently than contractors then our highways maintenance wouldn't be contracted out. When when we had a socialist government it was contracted out. The nice thing about using contractors is they are not on the payroll when there is no productive work to do.
Most of us work for wages. Some of us just have a better understanding of economics than others. I differentiate between those of us that work for wages and government employees that just collect a paycheque. After all it is the taxes on my wages that pays for them to sit around.
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
55,639
7,099
113
Washington DC
If government employees can do the job more efficiently than contractors then our highways maintenance wouldn't be contracted out. When when we had a socialist government it was contracted out. The nice thing about using contractors is they are not on the payroll when there is no productive work to do.
Precisely. Your belief is based on vague, overarching statments of economic theory, and completely unrelated to the actual facts and numbers.

How many Chicago School economists and taxslaves does it take to change a light bulb?

None. If the light bulb needed changing, the market would have done it already.


Most of us work for wages. Some of us just have a better understanding of economics than others. I differentiate between those of us that work for wages and government employees that just collect a paycheque. After all it is the taxes on my wages that pays for them to sit around.
I certainly agree with you that we should pay as little tax as possible. I've got my tax burden down to about 2%. That's all taxes together.

But you used "recycling center worker" as a term of contempt, and you've made it clear that you hate teachers. You're so deranged that you actually think they sit around and do nothing.

Such deeply, emotionally held and utterly counterfactual beliefs can only be called a religion.