Has Justin completely lost his faculties?

[JLM]

I just heard on the news this afternoon that Justin in going to reverse the decision of increasing the age of eligibility to receive the O.A.P. and will be reinstating it to age 65 in 2023. When I was a kid the age of eligibility was 70 and of course most people never got to see it so it was more or less a moot point. During the 60s they staggered it back to 65 at which time many of the recipients were dead within a couple of years anyway so again it was mainly a moot point. Since the 60s people are living many years longer on average and the work force has shrunk due to the size of families diminishing. What Justin is doing is coming across as a nice guy in the short term but putting us in an impossible situation in the long term. It's not sustainable. We are quickly reaching an era where people will be working for 35 years and retiring for 30. I guess in comparing Justin to Stephan Justin is the nice guy but Stephan knew what he was doing. I don't give a rat's a$$ about Liberal vs. Conservative but I do give a rat's a$$ about functional vs. dysfunctional.

 

[Frankiedoodle]

Re: Liberals to restore Old Age Security eligibility to 65

it is not unusual for people to be able to work, well into their 70's now. I don't know if people understand just how low CPP and OAS totals. Working past 65 is almost a necessity money wise. Also time wise. I was forced into retirement at 49 and now I am 58. I cannot work ever again. (No I am not in prison).
When I first retired it worked out ok for me, because I took care of my Mom. I was able to ease not having to be in the office 8 hours a day.
Some people don't have such an easy time of it.

 

[damngrumpy]

Re: Liberals to restore Old Age Security eligibility to 65

He was at a environmental meeting in Europe cause that is where the leaders decided
to meet when Harper was in charge and wouldn't go. He was invited to the States and
while there visited the UN better than making two trips and its a goo idea to keep it at 65

 

[Ludlow]

They orta do what they did in the movie Logans Run and just zap people over 40 and then all those problems would be solved.

 

[JLM]

They orta do what they did in the movie Logans Run and just zap people over 40 and then all those problems would be solved.

That would do it. Maybe it would be better in the long run if Justin just stopped whistling past the grave yard.

 

[gerryh]

I just heard on the news this afternoon that Justin in going to reverse the decision of increasing the age of eligibility to receive the O.A.P. and will be reinstating it to age 65 in 2023. When I was a kid the age of eligibility was 70 and of course most people never got to see it so it was more or less a moot point. During the 60s they staggered it back to 65 at which time many of the recipients were dead within a couple of years anyway so again it was mainly a moot point. Since the 60s people are living many years longer on average and the work force has shrunk due to the size of families diminishing. What Justin is doing is coming across as a nice guy in the short term but putting us in an impossible situation in the long term. It's not sustainable. We are quickly reaching an era where people will be working for 35 years and retiring for 30. I guess in comparing Justin to Stephan Justin is the nice guy but Stephan knew what he was doing. I don't give a rat's a$$ about Liberal vs. Conservative but I do give a rat's a$$ about functional vs. dysfunctional.

How old were you when you qualified, JLM?

 

[Bar Sinister]

No, he's showing that he has a spark of decency.

 

[JLM]

How old were you when you qualified, JLM?

65 like most people alive today! Need you ask?

No, he's showing that he has a spark of decency.

Yeah, it might look like that for a year or two or maybe even five, but eventually it will strangle us.
Harper figured out years ago it won't work, which doesn't take rocket science to understand.

 

[Jinentonix]

No, he's showing that he has a spark of decency.

Decency don't feed the bulldog.

 

[gerryh]

65 like most people alive today! Need you ask

I just wanted to hear you put it out there. To admit that you want to take away from others something that you received.

 

[damngrumpy]

This was an election issue and people voted for it he has kept his promise
end of story. People are saying oh god he is doing this or that and in fact
he is doing what he said and in some cases trying to do what he said and
finding out it doesn't work that way I would rather him do something work or
not than have him do nothing

 

[Jinentonix]

I would rather him do something work or
not than have him do nothing

I had a friend that had a wonderful saying. "Don't just do something, stand there!". In other words, don't rush into doing something just because you think it needs done. Take a moment to think it through first. In the case of political legislation, take a bit more than a moment and think it all the way through.
Just because an idea meshes with one's particular ideology doesn't automatically make it a good idea. I mean first there's a plan for a "Mincome", now he's lowering the OAS age back down to 65, God knows how much he's promised (so far) to the UN. Where's all this money supposed to come from, a bunch of uneducated, illiterate Syrian refugees who were rushed here after some nitwit spewed some bs about how they'd be an economic benefit to Canada?

 

[NancyDL]

I just heard on the news this afternoon that Justin in going to reverse the decision of increasing the age of eligibility to receive the O.A.P. and will be reinstating it to age 65 in 2023. When I was a kid the age of eligibility was 70 and of course most people never got to see it so it was more or less a moot point. During the 60s they staggered it back to 65 at which time many of the recipients were dead within a couple of years anyway so again it was mainly a moot point. Since the 60s people are living many years longer on average and the work force has shrunk due to the size of families diminishing. What Justin is doing is coming across as a nice guy in the short term but putting us in an impossible situation in the long term. It's not sustainable. We are quickly reaching an era where people will be working for 35 years and retiring for 30. I guess in comparing Justin to Stephan Justin is the nice guy but Stephan knew what he was doing. I don't give a rat's a$$ about Liberal vs. Conservative but I do give a rat's a$$ about functional vs. dysfunctional.

There's a practical reason for this: Keeping seniors on the job for an additional couple of years diminishes the number of jobs available for young people entering the workforce.

 

[Dixie Cup]

I don't know whose behind Justin in all this but to think logically isn't one of their better attributes. Having said that....


God forbid that politicians think "long-term" - that just isn't going to happen for the most-part. They only think of the next 4 years and how they can make it into another 4 years and the gullible, uneducated, uninterested (apathetic) public lets them get away with it.


Stephen Harper (like him or hate him) was one of the few in office in recent memory that had a long-term view of what should be happening based on current events but no one liked him for that so he got voted out. I'm wondering if that would have happened if he'd been flashier - huh! Oh well....


So how on earth is a politician supposed to do what's good for the country long-term when people object (selfishness) and vote them out. So I kinda feel for Justin a little - while he's a bit of a narcissist, he's vying for being a PM for the long-term and making hard, logical and common sense decisions won't get him there. He, too is being selfish like everyone else and on it goes.


I feel bad for the younger generation who'll have to pick up the tab!


JMHO

 

[JLM]

I just wanted to hear you put it out there. To admit that you want to take away from others something that you received.

I think everyone on the forum is aware of how your mind works, Gerry. First of all it's not about me, I just got the monthly cheque as a matter of course which does not in any way make it a sensible decision. I, like every one else getting it (if I live long enough) is going to suffer on account of it. I think you should get that nefarious mind of yours looked at Gerry, it just ain't functional.

 

[captain morgan]

I don't know whose behind Justin in all this but to think logically isn't one of their better attributes. Having said that....


God forbid that politicians think "long-term" - that just isn't going to happen for the most-part. They only think of the next 4 years and how they can make it into another 4 years and the gullible, uneducated, uninterested (apathetic) public lets them get away with it.


Stephen Harper (like him or hate him) was one of the few in office in recent memory that had a long-term view of what should be happening based on current events but no one liked him for that so he got voted out. I'm wondering if that would have happened if he'd been flashier - huh! Oh well....


So how on earth is a politician supposed to do what's good for the country long-term when people object (selfishness) and vote them out. So I kinda feel for Justin a little - while he's a bit of a narcissist, he's vying for being a PM for the long-term and making hard, logical and common sense decisions won't get him there. He, too is being selfish like everyone else and on it goes.


I feel bad for the younger generation who'll have to pick up the tab!


JMHO

The most pressing question surrounding this issue relates to the system being able to afford this (these policies)... One can make the argument either way, but in the end, if the tax base can not accommodate this policy, the result will require that the gvt take-on debt in order to support this service.

Bad news if this is Trudeau's plan... it has never worked well in the past

 

[JLM]

There's a practical reason for this: Keeping seniors on the job for an additional couple of years diminishes the number of jobs available for young people entering the workforce.

Yeah, "you're damned if you and you're damned if you don't", but the only other alternative I can see is keeping it at 65 while reducing it and that would cause a lot of screaming too. I suppose we could blame a lot of this job loss on the computer.

 

[captain morgan]

Yeah, "you're damned if you and you're damned if you don't", but the only other alternative I can see is keeping it at 65 while reducing it and that would cause a lot of screaming too. I suppose we could blame a lot of this job loss on the computer.

Robots will replace fast-food workers - May. 22, 2014

Meet "Smart Restaurant": The Minimum-Wage-Crushing, Burger-Flipping Robot | Zero Hedge

 

[JLM]

This was an election issue and people voted for it he has kept his promise
end of story. People are saying oh god he is doing this or that and in fact
he is doing what he said and in some cases trying to do what he said and
finding out it doesn't work that way I would rather him do something work or
not than have him do nothing

Nah, can't quite agree with that philosophy, Grumpy. He gets paid the big bucks to enact stuff that WILL work. We can't afford a bunch of bureaucraps who keep driving in the wrong direction!

I had a friend that had a wonderful saying. "Don't just do something, stand there!". In other words, don't rush into doing something just because you think it needs done. Take a moment to think it through first. In the case of political legislation, take a bit more than a moment and think it all the way through.
Just because an idea meshes with one's particular ideology doesn't automatically make it a good idea. I mean first there's a plan for a "Mincome", now he's lowering the OAS age back down to 65, God knows how much he's promised (so far) to the UN. Where's all this money supposed to come from, a bunch of uneducated, illiterate Syrian refugees who were rushed here after some nitwit spewed some bs about how they'd be an economic benefit to Canada?

You last sentence hits the nail on the head!

Taking OAS eligibility back to age 65 makes Canada the odd one out when it comes to global pensions | Financial Post

 

[EagleSmack]

I just heard on the news this afternoon that Justin in going to reverse the decision of increasing the age of eligibility to receive the O.A.P. and will be reinstating it to age 65 in 2023.

Am I to understand he has reversed the age back to Age 65.... effective in 2023? So this goes into effect seven years from now?