Tax payers pay taxes. The government has general revenues. They also collect premiums like CPP and EI. So some programs are funded by general taxes, and these are at the whims of Parliament, and some like CPP you pay for directly. If you spend any time thinking about this, then some programs obviously are more sustainable than others because there is dedicated funding for the program. You put in and you take out. OAS is only take out. CPP is invested and you get in what you put in.Quote has been trimmed, See full post:
OAS is not paid into directly, so how can you get out what you put in? The size of the OAS liability is determined by demographics and the rate the government sets. So when you were paying taxes, it's not going to be the same thing at all as when you start drawing. You don't get to take out what you put in, because that's not how the program is set-up. It's welfare for senior citizens. Consult the table to see how much you qualify for:
Old Age Security Payment Rates
Make note, there is no part of the calculation that considers what you paid in, because that's not how OAS works...I would think pension-aged Canadians would know this, though I guess at the same time it's not necessary to know how an internal combustion engine works to drive a car from point A to B.
Well, what you say might apply to the supplement but definitely not to the basic OAP. The prime minister and Garfield Weston even get to draw that.
I mispoke on this one but for some reason when I tried to deep six it five minutes later I couldn't.
Let's be clear, the Old Age Security cheque that seniors receive is not for money you paid into a fund...there is no fund. Look into CPP, you would have seen a line item deduction on your pay cheque. I do, it's always been there, even when I wasn't paying income tax as a student.
CPP is a fund that we all pay into, and what you get back depends partially on how much you put in. Your contributions are part of the calculation for receiving CPP benefits.
I'm not trying to tell you seniors that OAS is a bad thing, or that it's you folks being lazy or greedy. In fact there's entirely too much of that in this thread, which is a shame because I think this issue is very important. I wouldn't have spent so much time looking into this as a "youngster" if I didn't think it was important. I'm simply stating the simple facts that it is not an account; the government doesn't collect tax information about how much you paid into OAS, or how much I have paid into OAS. OAS is a liability paid for like thousands of other government liabilities. It's not at all like the Canada Pension Plan.
There is no way around it. People my age are going to be leaned on heavilly.
Here is another way of dealing with it. If you want to take the money from the old and they
would end up being poor under present circumstances in many cases, those on fixed incomes.
Instead give the money to the youth as suggested by some. Then allow the parents grand parents
and so on to bill the younger generation for everything they got, things like education and
health care, and the luxuries of life while growing up. Didn't think there would be too many takers
on that one.
In BC, there is a different situation that other Provinces. Parents even if they haven't laid eyes on
their child for decades can still sue for maintenance in the courts if they are destitute. That is a
fact. Another from a series of legal matters on open line. I didn't know this before until October so
perhaps some estranged parents living on the street should begin finding out where young successful
Johnny lives and go for a payday. Yes the law exists, am I serious about actually going after the
kids no, the problem is they can.
Nothing is owed to anyone we all have to get off our duff and procure our own wealth
Seniors don't want to give up money for younger gen: poll
VANCOUVER (NEWS1130) - More evidence that generational tensions are high; a poll (external - login to view) finds seniors aren't keen to relinquish publicly-funded services in order to help the struggling younger generations.
Seventy per cent of seniors asked felt they should be a top priority when it comes to doling out government cash.
UBC's Paul Kershaw (external - login to view) is surprised most of them say they know families are struggling. "Even so, 80 per cent of Canadians 55-plus say they have earned their fair share of the wealth produced by Canada's economy and therefore deserve to enjoy the benefits."
He believes the older generation might want to think about their kids a little more because they're the ones who will deal with the consequences of actions we take today.
"As the baby boomers in particular approach retirement, they're leaving larger government debts and an environmental record that isn't that great. It's going to be their kids and grandchildren who need to pay for it," he says.
Kershaw notes the result is especially surprising, considering things like housing values and lower poverty rates have made it much easier to retire.
He adds Statistics Canada (external - login to view) data show poverty among seniors has declined from 29 per cent in 1976 to less than five per cent in 2009. The poverty rate for families with kids under the age of six is 15 per cent.
The poll also shows 65 per cent of 18-44 year olds believe "a greater share of wealth produced in Canada should be invested in the next generation of families and children."
Seniors don't want to give up money for younger gen: poll - News1130 (external - login to view)
You think the young whipper snappers are to afraid to say that they want to steal our money?