Harper says `major' changes coming to pension system

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
3
36
London, Ontario
Re: Harper may annoy seniors.

He's announced potential changes to the O.A.P., one scenario could be raising the qualifying age to 67. The burning question is what changes is he going to make to politicians pensions? I suppose with many seniors now living well into their 90s something has to give. Stephen Harper: 'Major' changes coming to Canada's pension system, PM says in Davos speech | News | National Post

Yes and they're already backing away from it, from what I'm reading online right now.

Which means they're likely trying to sneak something else in....keeps your eyes peeled.
 

katiekat

New Member
Jan 27, 2012
1
0
1
Dear Society:




I am very angry. Yesterday I heard onthe news that Harper was proposing raising the age from 65 to 67 toqualify for old-age retirement, the old-age income supplement. I wasunclear about whether this applies to Canada Pension as well. Hesaid that people are living to be older. Not true! I am only 58 andmany of my friends are gone already, dying from stress-relateddiseases. I have a stress-related disease myself. There are morepeople because we are baby boomers, and baby boomers means that inour era more babies were born, so probably there are more peopleliving to old age. Most of us will not. My Grandparents lived to bein their nineties. My Parents were in their seventies. I suspect,although only God can know for sure, that I will be in my sixties. Like I said, I have a stress-related illness.




What is the answer? Kill off theelderly, by cutting the Health Care and their pensions, so that theyare forced to live in poverty! Give me a break! It is our seniors,our parents and our grandparents that have given to society the most. In their dedication, they have worked to create the best worldpossible. What a slap in the face, for a senior who has workedhis/her whole life to make this world a better place! So much forloyalty and dedication!




Then I hear about the GovernmentEmployees, who are collecting large pensions. Fine! They earnedthem! But then I hear that some of them may have a million or twodollars in investments and more than an adequate amount of money inthe bank!




I was a Health Care Aide/PSW, whoworked part-time in Nursing Homes and Home Care for several years. Because I was considered part-time, I earned very little pension formy old-age. Places hire part-time so that they can save on benefits.




I worked for a living. I was adedicated, loyal worker who hardly missed a shift. I loved my careerand the elderly people that I worked with. I put in about twentyyears in my career. I would probably not change a thing. I havealways wanted to help people.




I recent being mocked and laughed atbecause I am living in poverty and have a disability. I haveParkinson's disease, and yes I have noticed the smirks on certainpeoples faces, who do not know anything about me or my past. Theyhave categorized me as another disability bum taking advantage of thetax payers money and living on disability. They probably believethat I have never worked, and actually, I held a job that was justas responsible or more responsible that the jobs that these peopleare holding. Laugh at me! Okay! We all get old someday! Some ofus become ill. We never know what is in our future.




Let's as a society make some changes! Let's value our seniors and disabled. After all we may be in thesame position someday.




Respond to:




bellprincesskate@aol.com
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
Dear Society:




I am very angry. Yesterday I heard onthe news that Harper was proposing raising the age from 65 to 67 toqualify for old-age retirement, the old-age income supplement. I wasunclear about whether this applies to Canada Pension as well. Hesaid that people are living to be older. Not true! I am only 58 andmany of my friends are gone already, dying from stress-relateddiseases. I have a stress-related disease myself. There are morepeople because we are baby boomers, and baby boomers means that inour era more babies were born, so probably there are more peopleliving to old age. Most of us will not. My Grandparents lived to bein their nineties. My Parents were in their seventies. I suspect,although only God can know for sure, that I will be in my sixties. Like I said, I have a stress-related illness.




What is the answer?

The answer is to quit worrying before anything happens. NO one has said ANYTHING about C.P.P. Read the obituaries, probably 5%-10% of people are going to 90 or more, when I was a kid, to reach 90 was a very rare exception. Actually stress saves more people than it kills.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

shadowshiv

Dark Overlord
May 29, 2007
17,545
120
63
50
Re: Harper may annoy seniors.

Yes and they're already backing away from it, from what I'm reading online right now.

Which means they're likely trying to sneak something else in....keeps your eyes peeled.

He was just trying to float a balloon to see what would happen(which is why he did it while he was out of the country). The reaction that followed basically popped that balloon and I don't think he'll be trying to impliment that anytime soon(ever).
 

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
3
36
London, Ontario
Re: Harper may annoy seniors.

He was just trying to float a balloon to see what would happen(which is why he did it while he was out of the country). The reaction that followed basically popped that balloon and I don't think he'll be trying to impliment that anytime soon(ever).

That's exactly why he did it while out of the country. It is also not unheard of for any government to make a statement about something which they know will be controversial, back step on it, then introduce another change/cut/etc which is less controversial and that ends up slipping under the radar because the first announcement gets all the press. That's just political thinking, AKA misdirection.
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
Stephen Harper says `major' changes coming to Canada's pension system: speech

DAVOS, Switzerland - Prime Minister Stephen Harper has signalled his government will bring forward ``major transformations'' to the country in the coming months - in areas such as the retirement pension system, immigration, science and technology investment and the energy sector.

Of those reforms, Harper said, getting a grip on slowing the rising costs of the country's pension system is particularly critical.

In the wake of Harper's speech, it now appears that the Conservative government could be poised to gradually change the Old Age Security system so that the age of eligibility is raised to 67 from 65.

``In the months to come, our government will undertake major transformations to position Canada for growth over the next generation,'' said Harper. The Conservative government will table a budget in the coming weeks that is expected to set the stage for years of deficit-slashing and government reform.

Harper said the country's aging population has become a backdrop for his concern about how to keep the country strong over the long term.

``If not addressed promptly, this has the capacity to undermine Canada's economic position and, for that matter, that of all western nations well beyond the current economic crises.''

Indeed, Harper said the country's demographics - an aging populating and a dwindling workforce - constitute ``a threat to the social programs and services that Canadians cherish.''

For that reason, he said his government will ``be taking measures in the coming months.''

Harper did not specify what those measures will be, but he said they are necessary - not just to bring the government's finances back to a balanced budget in the medium term, ``but also to ensure the sustainability of our social programs and fiscal position over the next generation.''

``We have already taken steps to limit the growth of our health care spending over that period,'' said Harper.

``We must do the same for our retirement income system.''

Harper said the centrepiece of the public pension system - the Canada Pension Plan - is fully funded, actuarially sound and does not need to be changed.

But he added: ``For those elements of the system that are not funded, we will make the changes necessary to ensure sustainability for the next generation while not affecting current recipients.''

So far, the government has come forward with a plan to create a private pooled pension system to encourage Canadians to prepare for their retirement.

Still, there are concerns that as baby boomers approach retirement, the cost to government of providing public pensions will skyrocket.

In December, the National Post reported that there was internal debate within the government about increasing the age of eligibility for the other major element of the public pension scheme - Old Age Security - from 65 to 67.

Internal government documents project the cost of the OAS system will climb from $36.5 billion in 2010 to $48 billion in 2015. By 2030 - when the number of seniors is expected to climb to 9.3 million from 4.7 million now - the cost of the program could reach $108 billion.

Among the other priorities where change is coming:

Energy
The Conservative government will make it a ``national priority'' to ensure the country has the ``capacity to export our energy products beyond the United States, and specifically to Asia.''

``In this regard, we will soon take action to ensure that major energy and mining projects are not subject to unnecessary regulatory delays - that is, delay merely for the sake of delay.''

Harper did not explain what he has planned, although he and Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver have complained that foreign-backed ``radical'' opponents of the $5.5-billion Northern Gateway project have threatened to slow down hearings by the National Energy Board.

Immigration
The system faces ``significant reform,'' said Harper.

``We will ensure that, while we respect our humanitarian obligations and family reunification objectives, we make our economic and labour force needs the central goal of our immigration efforts in the future.''

Science
The government will continue to make ``key investments in science and technology'' that are necessary to sustain a ``modern competitive economy.''

``But we believe that Canada's less-than-optimal results for those investments is a significant problem for our country.''

In future, he said, there will be changes to rectify that problem.

Trade
Harper expects to complete negotiations on a Canada-European Union free-trade agreement this year.

Furthermore, he said, his government is committed to also completing negotiations for a free-trade deal with India by the end of 2013.

And Canada will begin talks to become a member of the Trans-Pacific Partnership while also pursuing opportunities to trade in the emerging market of Asia.

Harper arrived Wednesday at the World Economic Forum determined to tout Canada as a trading nation with a solid economic record and massive oil resources which are ready to be sold and shipped to customers worldwide.

Other members of cabinet who are attending the conference in the exclusive mountainside resort in the Swiss Alps are Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird, International Trade Minister Ed Fast and Bank of Canada governor Mark Carney.

Harper issued a scathing criticism of countries in the developed world, which he suggested had forgotten about the importance of creating economic growth. ``Is it the case that, in the developed world, too many of us have in fact become complacent about our prosperity?'' Harper asked.

He suggested that developed countries had taken wealth ``as a given . . . assuming it is somehow the natural order of things.''

Stephen Harper says `major' changes coming to Canada's pension system: speech

I'm still undecided for most of it, but I'm definitely for more free trade.
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
Free trade is fine as long as it's done using our currency. I'm not too keen on shoring up someone else's dollar.

And do you mean that reciprocally?

Personally, I'd be in favour of a world currency, but that's just me.