Seniors don't want to give up money for younger gen: poll

[captain morgan]

No one is accusing you of being lazy, I would say the opposite - personal drive, thrift, needs and wants clearly defined. It is true about manufacturing jobs, but skilled tradesmen are in short supply.
Why - Society ( parents) in general think that all should have a university education to succeed - Some are just not cut out for it. Trades can make 100 k a year or a lot more. Mill Right - 100 K easy -

The trades rely on demand in the market for their specific expertise. Seeing how Canada has gutted it's manufacturing/industrial sectors, that pretty much leaves the blue & white collar demographic to generate that demand. In order for that mill right to make $100k, there has to be a group with the cash to pay.

It's a catch-22; you can't have that demand unless there is revenues floating around to support that demand.

 

[JLM]

The trades rely on demand in the market for their specific expertise. Seeing how Canada has gutted it's manufacturing/industrial sectors, that pretty much leaves the blue & white collar demographic to generate that demand. In order for that mill right to make $100k, there has to be a group with the cash to pay.

It's a catch-22; you can't have that demand unless there is revenues floating around to support that demand.

Yep, sometimes times are tough, like back in the Hungry Thirties! While you are waiting for the $100 grand job, sometimes you have to spend time working at the $20 grand job. Years ago people started getting fussy about the wages so the immigrants moved in and took a lot of jobs, now we are saddled with them. :lol:

 

[mentalfloss]

The trades rely on demand in the market for their specific expertise. Seeing how Canada has gutted it's manufacturing/industrial sectors, that pretty much leaves the blue & white collar demographic to generate that demand. In order for that mill right to make $100k, there has to be a group with the cash to pay.

It's a catch-22; you can't have that demand unless there is revenues floating around to support that demand.

Is it possible to replace some of the more regimented or technical skilled trades with automated tech?

 

[captain morgan]

Yep, sometimes times are tough, like back in the Hungry Thirties! While you are waiting for the $100 grand job, sometimes you have to spend time working at the $20 grand job. Years ago people started getting fussy about the wages so the immigrants moved in and took a lot of jobs, now we are saddled with them. :lol:

Herein lies the problem JLM... Not enough $100k jobs to support the skilled trades, let alone the $20k positions.

When the economy shrinks, the tax revenues shrink at an even faster rate. What this means is that there are fewer dollars for the social programs, infrastructure and operating costs of gvt and munis...

Think about it.

Something like healthcare is specifically vulnerable to this trend... We have a large population of boomers that are poised to retire in the next few years.. Once these folks retire, there will be fewer tax dollars generated from income tax, and as there are fewer Gen-Xer's than there were boomers, the tax base shrinks on that basis alone.

Now, considering that our (collective) use of the healthcare system creates a situation where the majority of dollars spent on the system occur at birth and death (recalling that we have a large # of seniors retiring, not paying the same income tax and requiring more dollars in heathcare resources) - what do you think is gonna happen?:lol::lol:

Is it possible to replace some of the more regimented or technical skilled trades with automated tech?

I would not be surprised, however, that may impair the tax base somewhat.

The scary thing about the next 20 years is based on the reality that we have a smaller population of people available to replace the boomers.

 

[JLM]

Herein lies the problem JLM... Not enough $100k jobs to support the skilled trades, let alone the $20k positions.

When the economy shrinks, the tax revenues shrink at an even faster rate. What this means is that there are fewer dollars for the social programs, infrastructure and operating costs of gvt and munis...

Think about it.

Something like healthcare is specifically vulnerable to this trend... We have a large population of boomers that are poised to retire in the next few years.. Once these folks retire, there will be fewer tax dollars generated from income tax, and as there are fewer Gen-Xer's than there were boomers, the tax base shrinks on that basis alone.

Now, considering that our (collective) use of the healthcare system creates a situation where the majority of dollars spent on the system occur at birth and death (recalling that we have a large # of seniors retiring, not paying the same income tax and requiring more dollars in heathcare resources) - what do you think is gonna happen?:lol::lol:



.

You've got the situation pretty well pegged, but like you I don't have an inkling what is going to happen. What COULD happen is a period of DEFLATION, that will possibly solve immediate problems. The one problem is when $100 grand jobs change to being $20 grand jobs, obviously the professional sector like engineers, doctors, lawyers will have to pare their fees accordingly. Things WILL sort themselves out - the human animal isn't quite stupid enough to voluntarily starve to death.

The scary thing about the next 20 years is based on the reality that we have a smaller population of people available to replace the boomers.

Do you think it would take many people to replace the boomers? :smile:

 

[captain morgan]

You've got the situation pretty well pegged, but like you I don't have an inkling what is going to happen. What COULD happen is a period of DEFLATION, that will possibly solve immediate problems.

A prolonged recession can have that very same affect as well.

Like it or not, investment from the private sector is what drives any economy and if the investment climate is poor, everything grinds to a halt.. Gvt can step in to spur things, but the risk is that you go down the same path as Greece.

The one problem is when $100 grand jobs change to being $20 grand jobs, obviously the professional sector like engineers, doctors, lawyers will have to pare their fees accordingly. Things WILL sort themselves out - the human animal isn't quite stupid enough to voluntarily starve to death.

You are quite correct in this statement.. That said, there is a transition zone here where a lot of money is lost, by virtue of not being realized to begin with or by folks that can't afford their (previously affordable) lifestyles... Selling off assets at a loss is the result (and certainly not the cause of any generational issue), but this also deflates the market and everyone gets impacted.

In the end, what I'm driving at is that as the economy shrinks, there is less money to spread around by gvt and considering that the boomers will soon in a position wherein they will need more services, having fewer dollars to fund it WILL be a huge problem.

Do you think it would take many people to replace the boomers? :smile:

The real question here is how many people will it take to replace the boomer's income tax contributions... Remember what you said about taking the $20k job 'til the $100k job is available?:icon_smile:

Not a pretty picture for anyone, especially for those that are retired or are planning to retire soon, is it?

 

[mentalfloss]

The real question here is how many people will it take to replace the boomer's income tax contributions... Remember what you said about taking the $20k job 'til the $100k job is available?:icon_smile:

In the end, who's out more money?

The boomer or the boomer's kid?

 

[IdRatherBeSkiing]

I guess that is a major point at where we disagree. I don't see many failures in my generation or the twenty somethings, at least not in comparison to the seniors. I think my generation is a rousing success and judging from my daughter and her friends, I see a lot of positives coming behind me. That's really what separates us. You like to push others down in a feeble attempt to lift yourselves up whereas I am sticking to the facts of the matter. Your success or failures as a group have not affected me to any great extent. Sure, one could argue that the debt load you shoveled onto successive generations because of your extravagant spending "affects" me but the reality is that I'm doing fine.

You will notice that in over 160 posts, not one senior has bothered to point out exactly how they have benefited those coming behind them yet they love to call them ingrates. On the other hand, I can provide ample evidence of seniors benefiting from the generosity of others. One example would be how society subsidizes seniors through seniors discounts. Our local grocery store offers 10% discounts to seniors. Of course, the grocery store owner doesn't pay this out of his own pocket. He raises the prices for everybody else in order to compensate. So, the twenty and forty somethings you like to call ingrates are paying extra for food so you can eat cheaper. Rather than call them ingrates, perhaps you should thank them for their generosity. That is, after all, what somebody that isn't an ingrate would do.

So you are bellyaching about a seniors discount?

Contrary to your assertion, I am actually not an old fart. I pay the same as you for my goods and services. However, I fail to see what benifits (aside from the seniors discount or seniors menu) the many lucrative benifits they are enjoying at your expense. Please list.

The only benifits I can think of are Universal Healthcare and CPP/OAS. These are certainly one reason my taxes are high and if we completely dismantled Canad'a social security net, we could greatly reduce my tax load. However, I am not sure I would want to live in that Canada. Are you suggesting this approach?

 

[captain morgan]

In the end, who's out more money?

The boomer or the boomer's kid?

That's a really interesting question.

Part of me believes that if the gvt gets into a cash-crunch scenario, they very well may try and raid the pension funds, RRSPs, RIFs, etc by virtue of changing the rules or by taxes. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if the gvt is planning on making all kinds of money via 'death taxes' when the boomer's estate transfers to the kids.

In the final analysis, I suppose that the answer to your question will be generated when we see what gvt does.

 

[JLM]

I don't think there is much doubt that things are going to get tough unless you are a millionaire. But a lot depends on your definition of tough. May have to give up Big Macs and start packing a sandwich and a thermos. :lol:

 

[Spade]

What us old timers don't have now that old timers had 50 years ago:

1. Free transit passes
2. Cigarettes for $0.35 a pack
3. A round of golf for $5.00 or less
4. Sunday-go-to-meeting shoes for less than $20.00
5. Haircuts for $2.00
6. A full meal with desert for a buck.
7. A newspaper for a nickel
8. Strontium-90 in their milk
9. Water from the community well
10 A sense of humour

These are tough times for seniors

 

[#juan]

No, not at all. I've seen how your generation measured up. You created a cradle to grave security blanket and stuck your descendants with the bill. I understand you seniors are proud of that accomplishment. It's the main reason you deserve so much ridicule.

Our "security blanket" is our savings and investments that we have paid into for the last thirty years or so plus the fact that our home is paid off. My son and his wife put off having children until their mortgage was paid off. With both of them working it took them six years. We now have two grandchildren who have always had their mom at home.
It is possible to make yourself a comfortable retirement. You just have to work at it. I'm proud that at seventy two, I am not a burden to anyone and I don't think I deserve ridicule from the likes of you.

 

[Niflmir]

I love hearing the: I started with nothing and got this far argument. For your information, that comic is entitled, "More than nothing".

Those people just don't get it. Times have changed. About 30 years ago, plenty of jobs didn't even require a high school education. Now a basic college degree is all but a requirement for most jobs, and unlike many places, Canadians don't get a free education.

By the time most Canadians look for work, they have the equivalent of a small mortgage that they cannot declare bankruptcy from and nothing to show for it in relation to someone who just graduated from high school 30 years ago.

This society is part of the legacy that the past generation has given to us. If it is in such a sorry state of affairs that austerity measures must be put in place, I don't think it unjust that the people who created this situation be given part of the burden.

 

[Cannuck]

Our "security blanket" is our savings and investments that we have paid into for the last thirty years or so plus the fact that our home is paid off. My son and his wife put off having children until their mortgage was paid off. With both of them working it took them six years. We now have two grandchildren who have always had their mom at home.
It is possible to make yourself a comfortable retirement. You just have to work at it. I'm proud that at seventy two, I am not a burden to anyone and I don't think I deserve ridicule from the likes of you.

You are missing the point.

http://epe.lac-bac.gc.ca/100/201/301/public_accounts_can/2008/50-eng.pdf

Page 9

33 billion dolars a year to service a debt that the seniors created and stuck their kids and their grandkids with. The security blanket was the social programs your generation benefitted from without paying for. You are simply fooling yourself when you suggest that you aren't a burden to anyone. Do you honestly believe the extra tax dollars your kid's generation pays to service the debt your generation created isn't a burden to them?

So you are bellyaching about a seniors discount?

Of course not. I'm merely pointing out that it exists thereby disproving the nonsense spewed by seniors that the younger generations aren't suppoerting them. As I've said before, the evidence clearly shows that seniors are a financial burden to the younger generations and not the other way around. Since seniors in general do not appreciate what the younger generations are doing for them, it is rather funny that they like to throw around terms like ingrates when referring to their children.

 

[mentalfloss]

New Canadians more likely to belong to "Sandwich Generation" and to feel related financial pressure

TORONTO, Dec. 15, 2011 /CNW Telbec/ - Of the new Canadians who reported providing daily care for their parents in Desjardins Financial Security's (DFS) most recent health survey, 71 per cent admitted to feeling a related financial impact, compared to 61 per cent of all respondents who provided daily support.

The survey also found that 20 per cent of those respondents who were born outside Canada were more likely to be members of the "Sandwich Generation" — adults who provide personal and financial support to their parents and children simultaneously — compared to seven per cent of all respondents.

"Most Canadians are finding it difficult to make ends meet. But these results are showing us that immigrants are feeling particularly overwhelmed because they're balancing more than the average Canadian," said Reh Bhanji, regional sales manager of the Wealth Management and Life and Health Insurance division at Desjardins Group. "The 'Sandwich Generation' may be a new phenomenon in North America, but it's not for many new Canadians — it's life. They're juggling the challenge of establishing roots in a new country, raising a family and caring for elderly parents, all within a very tight budget."

Having a plan is essential

Despite their financial difficulties, those who had immigrated to Canada less than five years ago were more likely to have a plan with their parents to provide for their care (40 per cent compared to 18.9 per cent overall).

"It's encouraging that many new Canadians have plans in place to care for their families," said Bhanji. "However, there are many who are still struggling financially. Working with a financial advisor can help rebalance the plan to ensure that your family's financial security is assured while providing your parents with the care that they need."

About the Survey

SOM Surveys, Opinion Polls and Marketing conducted this Web survey on behalf of Desjardins Financial Security from August 10 to 23, 2011. In total, 3,120 questionnaires were completed with a sample of Canadian Web panellists aged 18 to 64 years old. The data was weighted to reflect the distribution of the Canadian population aged 18 to 64 years old in terms of gender and mother tongue distributions in 14 regions (Atlantic Provinces, Montreal CMA and elsewhere in Quebec, Toronto CMA and elsewhere in Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Calgary CMA and elsewhere in Alberta, Vancouver CMA and elsewhere in British Columbia). The data was also weighted to reflect the population distributions in terms of the joint age-gender distribution and the proportion of adults who live alone in Quebec, Ontario and elsewhere in Canada.

About Desjardins Financial Security

Desjardins Financial Security, a subsidiary of Desjardins Group, the leading cooperative financial group in Canada, specializes in providing life insurance, health insurance and retirement savings products to individuals and groups. Every day over five million Canadians rely on DFS to ensure their financial security. DFS employs over 4,000 people and administers 27.7 billion in assets from offices in several cities across the country including Vancouver, Calgary, Winnipeg, Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal, Quebec City, Lévis, Halifax and St. John's. For more information, visit the website at www.desjardinsfinancialsecurity.com.

DESJARDINS FINANCIAL SECURITY | New Canadians more likely to belong to "Sandwich Generation" and to feel related financial pressure

 

[IdRatherBeSkiing]

Of course not. I'm merely pointing out that it exists thereby disproving the nonsense spewed by seniors that the younger generations aren't suppoerting them. As I've said before, the evidence clearly shows that seniors are a financial burden to the younger generations and not the other way around. Since seniors in general do not appreciate what the younger generations are doing for them, it is rather funny that they like to throw around terms like ingrates when referring to their children.

You are supporting them by choice. You could visit only establishments that do not offer seniors discounts. Perhaps you should also boycott those restaurants providing kids menus as clearly this is subsidizing those who are below 12. They should have to pay their own way!

 

[Cannuck]

You are supporting them by choice. You could visit only establishments that do not offer seniors discounts. Perhaps you should also boycott those restaurants providing kids menus as clearly this is subsidizing those who are below 12. They should have to pay their own way!

Why would I want to boycott the establishments? I have no problem supporting the senior population. I'm simply explaining the realities of the world we live in and throwing cold water on the idea that seniors look after their kids and their kids are ungrateful. The truth is that the exact opposite is true.

 

[IdRatherBeSkiing]

Why would I want to boycott the establishments? I have no problem supporting the senior population. I'm simply explaining the realities of the world we live in and throwing cold water on the idea that seniors look after their kids and their kids are ungrateful. The truth is that the exact opposite is true.

What a warped way to look at things.

I am supporting the single welfare mom who can't get a job to support her 5 kids. I am supporting all types of unemployable people. I am supporting people who are a few bricks short of a load in various mental facilities. I am supporting those who get cancer or other illness or accident requiring medical care. And I am supporting assholes like Paul Bernardo enjoy a lifetime of free room and board.

Thats the way our society works. Those that can pay for those that can't from their taxes. Its not perfect. Certainly I would like to see a few of these leeches released from the public trough. But the alternative is an everybody for oneself version of capitalism which I cannot support. You may desire it but I am very scared of what type of Canada we would become.

 

[Cannuck]

But the alternative is an everybody for oneself version of capitalism which I cannot support. You may desire it but I am very scared of what type of Canada we would become.

You aren't very quick on the uptake are you? Absolutely nothing I have said suggests I desire an "everybody for oneself version of capitalism". In fact, in my post you responded to, I specifically stated that I have no problem supporting the senior population. I'm merely pointing out that I do (contrary to what the seniors will admit)

 

[#juan]

Why would I want to boycott the establishments? I have no problem supporting the senior population. I'm simply explaining the realities of the world we live in and throwing cold water on the idea that seniors look after their kids and their kids are ungrateful. The truth is that the exact opposite is true.

The premise of this topic is sounding more and more like horse sh-t all the time. Both my children went to university. We provided tuition
and room and board while they were going to university. They both found part time jobs that paid for books and spending money. I know I spent over twenty six thousand dollars for tuition for the two of them. It's hard to put a value on room and board but five or six hundred a month seems to be
the going rate but we didn't charge them. As a result of our efforts both my kids earn a good living and pay more taxes than if they hadn't
gone to college. We certainly gave up money for our younger generation. I have no reason to think that our children are ungrateful nor do I expect them to be forever in our debt. We are a family.