Harper says `major' changes coming to pension system


TenPenny
+2
#91
Quote: Originally Posted by DurryView Post

We don't need the government to provide us with a pension. They give us all the tools we need to provide us to look after ourselves ie RRSP, CPP, TFSA plus company pensions. OAS is just a waste of taxpayer money.. Can it !!


The CPP is a pension provided by the government. So you're saying we don't need the government to provide us with a pension because they provide us with a pension.
 
petros
#92
I was wondering that too....
 
Spade
+1
#93
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

I quit about 4 weeks ago now but if they ever came out with bacon flavoured smokes I think I'd be smoking again.

I quit a couple of decades ago, but I still dream about them. Occasionally, when I see my neighbour smoking, I am overcome with an urge to leap the fence, throw the buggar down, grab his cigarette and smoke it to the filtre.

Good on you, Petros. Keep it up!
 
petros
#94
Gees. I'm glad I'm not Henry.

It was easier than I bitched about.
 
Spade
#95
Henry has taken to smoking indoors. Something about his nerves...
 
L Gilbert
+2
#96
Quote: Originally Posted by SpadeView Post

The elderly smoke menthol.

lol Just as harsh.

Quote: Originally Posted by TenPennyView Post

The CPP is a pension provided by the government.

Wrong. It's a pension that the gov't manages for us using our contributions. OAP is provided by the gov't using money it got from us by taxation.
Quote:

So you're saying we don't need the government to provide us with a pension because they provide us with a pension.

It sounded that way to me, too. lol
 
petros
#97
Quote: Originally Posted by SpadeView Post

Henry has taken to smoking indoors. Something about his nerves...

Poor Mrs.Henry.
 
Durry
+1
#98
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPennyView Post

The CPP is a pension provided by the government. So you're saying we don't need the government to provide us with a pension because they provide us with a pension.

No, thats not what I said, I said the Gov provides the tools...etc
Learn to read!!!
The Gov does not fund CPP..
 
mentalfloss
#99
Does Harper really need to raise the retirement age?

Kevin Milligan is Associate Professor of Economics at the University of British Columbia

In his address to the Davos Economic Forum, Prime Minister Harper raised the issue of major reforms to Canada’s public retirement income system. If a pension debate is upon us, then let’s start with a look at some facts about the federal system of public pensions.

Currently (external - login to view), the core Old Age Security pension is available starting at age 65. The Guaranteed Income Supplement, paid to about a third of seniors, begins at age 65. The Allowance for survivor are paid from ages 60 to 64 in some circumstances. The Canada and Quebec Pension Plans allow reduced pensions to begin at age 60, with ‘full’ pensions at age 65. The Prime Minister explicitly (and correctly (external - login to view)) pointed out that the Canada Pension Plan is not in financial difficulty. Instead, the target of reform appears to be Old Age Security.

If Canada does consider a change to retirement ages, we would not be alone. Among the G8 countries, the United States, the United Kingdom, Italy (external - login to view), Germany (external - login to view), and France (external - login to view) have already made upward changes to their retirement ages. In Japan and Russia (external - login to view), it is being discussed.

Is Canada really different? No and yes.

Canada is not different because, in common with most other countries, Canadians are living longer. For men, a 65 year old in 2007 could expect (external - login to view) to live another 18 years to age 83 -- a full 5 years longer than was the case in 1967. Women’s life expectancy at age 65 has also increased by 5 years. This improved longevity means that existing pension promises become ever-more expensive.

On the other hand, Canada is different because, unlike most other countries, our public pension commitments are not a substantial threat to our public finances. The Canada Pension Plan is in long-run balance (external - login to view). Old Age Security currently (external - login to view) takes only 2.41 per cent of GDP. Very few OECD (external - login to view) countries have lower levels of public pension spending as a share of GDP than Canada. To take the extreme example, Italy spends more than 14 per cent of GDP on public pensions -- up from 10 per cent only a few years ago.

How will spending in Canada grow as the baby boomers age? By 2031 -- at the peak of the baby-boom retirement wave -- the share of GDP spent on Old Age Security will rise to 3.14 per cent, for an increase of 0.73 per cent over today’s level. Now, an increase of 0.73 per cent of GDP cannot be ignored, but neither is it disastrous. To provide some scale, David Dodge and Richard Dion project (external - login to view) that spending on health will grow from 12 per cent to 18.7 per cent of GDP by 2031, for an increase of 6.7 percentage points. In the fight for government spending dollars in 2031, health is the elephant and the Old Age Security pension is the mouse.

Whatever the fiscal savings of pushing up the Old Age Security retirement age, we also must consider the cost. The wellbeing of Canadian seniors has improved (external - login to view) tremendously over the last 40 years -- higher incomes, better consumption, and healthier lives. However, in the years approaching retirement ages, an increasing number of Canadians are unable to work due to disability, declining job skills, or other reasons.

In research in progress, I am finding that around three quarters of those not working in the years just before reaching age 65 have other sources of income sufficient to get them out of low-income range. Of course, the flipside is that one quarter of them do not. If the retirement age increases, these Canadians may suffer as they wait for their public pension cheques to begin flowing.

Economy Lab, winner of the 2011 Eppy Award (external - login to view) for best business blog. Follow Economy Lab (external - login to view) on twitter

Does Harper really need to raise the retirement age? - The Globe and Mail
 
TenPenny
+1
#100
Quote: Originally Posted by DurryView Post

No, thats not what I said, I said the Gov provides the tools...etc
Learn to read!!!
The Gov does not fund CPP..

It was what you wrote.

Learn to write!!
 
JLM
#101
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPennyView Post

The CPP is a pension provided by the government. So you're saying we don't need the government to provide us with a pension because they provide us with a pension.

 
taxslave
#102
Quote: Originally Posted by lone wolfView Post

Compulsory savings don't work for people who are just making ends meet or less. Everything I had put aside vanished in the eleven year gap between on-the-job accident and when I finally got a disability pension....

All it took for many workers was for their entire industry to crash. Especially in one horse towns.
 
Durry
#103
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalflossView Post

[
If the retirement age increases, these Canadians may suffer as they wait for their public pension cheques to begin flowing.

[/I]

Public Pension, this is only OAS, this is only $540/ mo max right now... Who would retire to wait for this amount??
 
petros
#104
OAS is like old people welfare and NOT pensions.
 
MHz
#105
And here I didn't think anything could top aids emptying out the bars a little before my divorce was final.

Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

All it took for many workers was for their entire industry to crash. Especially in one horse towns.

How many workers are there in a town with only 'machine'? I count 1.
Isn't everybody else supposed to be 'saving energy'

Quote: Originally Posted by DurryView Post

Public Pension, this is only OAS, this is only $540/ mo max right now... Who would retire to wait for this amount??

Better get you ticket to Chili ready. Is freighter tourist still the cheapest way to travel and do they have broadband?
 
petros
#106
I've been to Chile a couple times but I've never been to Chili. Is it chilly in Chili?
 
lone wolf
#107
Not my five-alarm variety....
 
Cannuck
#108
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

I've been to Chile a couple times but I've never been to Chili. Is it chilly in Chili?

I had Chile for supper last night and leftovers tonight. I had to warm up my Chile because it was Chilli in the fridge. I'm not sure if the recipe is from Mexico or Chilly.
 
jwmcq625
#109
Quote: Originally Posted by JLMView Post

I got $2.15 on the OAS.

Big deal and in today's Canada, that won't even buy you a loaf of bread.

Quote: Originally Posted by KreskinView Post

We'll be going through a demographic seniors bubble over the next few decades and it will be difficult to maintain our population base. How are we to pay for it? Something has to give sooner or later.

Harper & Company is real good at saying what he is going to do to us, now how about we hear what he is going to do, FOR US? Read this quore somewhere, but Harper and Company better think twice about touching the OAS before he first scaled back the pension the MP's are ripping the Canadian taxpayers for! "The reason Politicians try so hard to get re-elected is that they would 'hate' to have to make a living under the laws they've passed."
 
mentalfloss
#110
PM’s message to Canadians: Rethink your retirement

Ottawa is asking Canadians to rethink their senior years, sending a clear message that individuals must save more on their own for retirement.

Faced with an aging population that he claims poses a threat to our social programs and services, Stephen Harper unveiled an ambitious blueprint for change this week that takes aim at immigration, trade and energy policies. But perhaps the most ambitious – and controversial – of these changes will be in the area of retirement reform.

The obvious motivation is cost. The Prime Minister’s Office and other government officials pointed reporters to the most recent actuarial report on Old Age Security, which estimates the cost of the program will climb to $108-billion in 2030 from $36.5-billion in 2010.

But retirement expenditures are only one part of the challenge. One of the biggest obstacles posed by Canada's aging demographic is the labour force: keeping people working for longer. At the moment, there are 4.6 workers for every person over 65 in Canada. That ratio, known as the dependency ratio, is expected to drop below three-to-one by 2031, which would mean fewer people working and paying taxes to support social programs. Canadians also live longer now, so someone retiring at 65 can expect to collect a pension for nearly 20 years.

As Ottawa grapples with how best to reform the system, the question is not merely whether Canadians will have to shoulder greater responsibility for their retirement needs, but whether they will have to work longer as well.

Vera Howe, a 61-year-old Toronto mother and grandmother, said she and her husband were very upset by the Prime Minister’s speech and the prospect of a raised age of eligibility for OAS.

She works with people with developmental disabilities. It’s a physical job that requires a lot of lifting. Her husband is a tradesman who works in a factory and in recent years has suffered two injuries. She wants to retire at 65, but without OAS she’ll be in financial trouble, she said.

“I would be in poverty,” she said. “I couldn’t even pay the mortgage. And I would still have a mortgage, mind you.”

“You start working at 18 years old, you’ve worked this far only to see the goalposts moved away.”

Canadians who pay into the Canada Pension Plan receive benefits, but unlike CPP, which has a pool of money behind it, the OAS program is paid out of government revenues. OAS eligibility is based on a senior’s income.

A day after Mr. Harper's speech in Davos, Switzerland, the Conservative government moved to address concerns, saying any changes would be phased in gradually.

The Conservatives never mentioned changes to Old Age Security during last year’s election campaign, yet Ottawa confirmed Friday that it is looking at changes to OAS to make it financially stable over the long term.

Ted Menzies, the Conservative Minister of State for Finance who has held extensive cross-country hearings on retirement issues, said the government hasn’t made a final decision on OAS changes.

“We’re looking at many different options. I’m not sure just which ones are going to be viewed as being the most effective,” he said.

“But we need to also remember that OAS was never intended to fund an entire retirement for anyone,” he said. “There is responsibility on the individual to save for themselves.”

Most Group of Seven countries are grappling with the problem of unfavourable demographics. While it is undoubtedly a challenge for Canada, University of British Columbia economist Kevin Milligan said the country is in a much better position in this regard than almost any of its G7 peers, all of which have already raised retirement ages or are debating the issue.

“While we have a dependency ratio that’s going in the wrong direction in Canada … the issue is not as big as it is for Italy, Germany, Japan. Those places have serious crises,” he said. “That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t think about it though.”

Don Drummond, a former senior federal Finance Department official who is now advising the Ontario government, said Ottawa will have to give Canadians “a hell of a lot of notice” before changing the eligibility year for OAS and the Guaranteed Income Supplement, and predicted there will be considerable social impacts if it is implemented.

Mr. Drummond said a 20-year time period – from initial notice to when it’s fully phased in – is probably the shortest lead time that a country could give.

“I would think it would have to be 20 to 25 years before you are fully up to age 67,” Mr. Drummond said.

“If you’re 47 years old today, your life cycle of earnings is kind of set right now by what you’ve already done. It’s not giving you a heck of a lot of time.”

One potential solution to the demographic problem is tapping the potential of new Canadians, whose job participation is disproportionately lower than the country's average. By 2031, roughly 60 per cent of Canadians over 15 will be in the work force, down from nearly 67 per cent today, according to Statistics Canada. That would be the lowest rate since the 1970s. However, the report noted that if immigrants and visible minorities were to participate in the labour force at the same rate as other Canadians, that drop could be cut almost in half.

Parliamentary budget watchdog Kevin Page says the 2012 budget – long before the next election – is a good place to “front-end load some of the tough decisions” on challenges Ottawa faces.

He said the Harper government’s January, 2012, decision to restrict growth in health and social transfers to the provinces as of 2016 has improved Ottawa’s fiscal prospects to the extent that Canada could afford to fund existing increases in OAS payments.

“We don’t have a long-term sustainability problem,” Mr. Page said. “I think he’s doing it for broader problems.”

Harper’s message to Canadians: Rethink your retirement - The Globe and Mail
 
petros
#111
Pete's message to the PM: Rethink your life.
 
Walter
+3
#112
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

I quit about 4 weeks ago now but if they ever came out with bacon flavoured smokes I think I'd be smoking again.

Good for you and good kuck. I quit many times before I was finally able to kick the habit. It'll be 20 years this fall since I had my last ciggy.
 
#juan
-2
#113
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalflossView Post

PMs message to Canadians: Rethink your retirement


Harper’s message to Canadians: Rethink your retirement - The Globe and Mail

Isn't it great how PM Harper can announce something this important in Switzerland. Major changes
to our pension system are surely important enough to be announced directly to the Canadian people
rather than running them up the flag pole in a foreign country. This shows Harper's basic dishonesty.
What else is he going to do?
 
Durry
+1
#114
Quote: Originally Posted by #juanView Post

What else is he going to do?

I hope he cuts off GIS & OAS for immigrant seniors unless they have worked in this country for a minimum of 10 yrs.

Right now, many senior immigrants get here thru family unification program or via refugee program and start claiming OAS and GIS after being here for 5 yrs. They never have to work to get this benefit.

Right now, in Toronto, of the total senior population, 65% are immigrants, in Vancouver, senior immigrants make up for over 50% of total seniors.
Canada's population of immigrants is about 20%... Something is wrong with this picture. Canada has become a haven for immigrant seniors. !!
 
Cannuck
#115
Quote: Originally Posted by DurryView Post

I hope he cuts off GIS & OAS for immigrant seniors unless they have worked in this country for a minimum of 10 yrs.

Right now, many senior immigrants get here thru family unification program or via refugee program and start claiming OAS and GIS after being here for 5 yrs. They never have to work to get this benefit.

Does anybody have to work to get OAS?
 
Durry
#116
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

Does anybody have to work to get OAS?

No, you only have to have Canadian citizenship.
 
taxslave
#117
Quote: Originally Posted by MHzView Post

And here I didn't think anything could top aids emptying out the bars a little before my divorce was final.


How many workers are there in a town with only 'machine'? I count 1.
Isn't everybody else supposed to be 'saving energy'


Better get you ticket to Chili ready. Is freighter tourist still the cheapest way to travel and do they have broadband?

Think Burns lake. At least 300 good paying jobs just went up in smoke. I can think of quite a few other mill towns that closed down and when that happens your house is worth nothing but the mortgage carries on and people with 30 years or so in an industry are usually not able to quickly change careers.
 
Cannuck
#118
Quote: Originally Posted by DurryView Post

I hope he cuts off GIS & OAS for immigrant seniors unless they have worked in this country for a minimum of 10 yrs.

Right now, many senior immigrants get here thru family unification program or via refugee program and start claiming OAS and GIS after being here for 5 yrs. They never have to work to get this benefit.

Quote: Originally Posted by DurryView Post

No, you only have to have Canadian citizenship.

Since nobody has to work for the benefit, why should immigrants. My mother never worked a day in her life if you discount house work. Do you have a problem with her as well?
 
taxslave
#119
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

Since nobody has to work for the benefit, why should immigrants. My mother never worked a day in her life if you discount house work. Do you have a problem with her as well?

Well, it is her fault that you are here.
 
Durry
#120
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

Since nobody has to work for the benefit, why should immigrants. My mother never worked a day in her life if you discount house work. Do you have a problem with her as well?

Well working was just an example, the issue is that there has to be some policy in place that would prevent immigrant senior scamming the good will of Hard working tax paying Canadians.

One of the best scams going is like what the E Indians do a lot of. They come here on family unification program, put all their Indian money in a foreign account, and when they get citizenship, claim OAS & GIS as well as use our long term care health facilities.
Is this fair ??
 

Similar Threads

9
Harper Saw It Coming
by StephenNesbitt | Oct 7th, 2008
no new posts