And of course you will promptly return your OAS when it comes in the mail....or even better you will not apply for it...
lol Money; it's just a tool of power.Most of what we call money is a notation against columns in bank ledgers. The actual wealth does not exist until you sweat.
Here's the eternal formula followed by the money changers, silver/gold/ledger=arms industry=conquest/war=stolen wealth. Without that ancient power train modern economics won't work.![]()
The Babylonian Woe-----------David Astle
Search around for that book on the net. It's a ripping good, if not very depressing, history of the money con.
So 13.5% of total revenue goes for pensions! What is wrong with that? It's very close or even less than individuals pay to fund their doddering years.
""According to the newspaper article 15% of canadians receive OAS which means that the total paid out is more like $32 Billion paid out annually that as you say is going directly into the bank or being used for hobbies like travel or golf."""
Right, and oil change for the caddy. - Paying the bills - deciding whether to eat tuna or cat food.- or eating or paying the rent - or buying shoes.- travel to the food bank - hobbies like seeing how long one can go without basic necessities.
Living life large, that's a lot of us.
If a guy wants to change his opinion there is nothing wrong with that, just say that's what you are doing. The reason I got so upset with him was his denigration of seniors a year or so back and because I happened to be one I was just dirt under his feet. Now he speaks quite highly of them, but he's never apologized for his boorishness so I suspect he's changed his tune because he knows his original position is an unpopular one and if there's one thing I can't stand too much of it's hypocrisy. Everyone is guilty of a little bit. -![]()
Not to point out the obvious, or maybe because it is. the 13.5% is only the OAS component of the senior payouts. If you had read the article, which I'm sure you didn't, you will see that seniors get 42% of all social benefits.
You would have read this if you saw the article but I will give it to you here because I'm sure you don't want to mess up your points with facts. But did you know that only 3% of food bank users are seniors and 50% of them are children?
Again, if you had read the article only 3% of food bank users are seniors which means that most of the able-bodies seniors are doing just fine. It's the young people that are having trouble making ends meet.
I NEVER denigrated seniors. I thank them for the work they have done during their lifes and hope they enjoy their retirement. However being thankful for their work doesn't automatically translate into giving them travel money for their winter vacations.
Pay no mind to JLM Zipperfish. He got upset with me because I took him to task on his attacks on "the younger generations". I have no issue with seniors. I have an issue with seniors who believe I owe them something simply because they were born before 1948. JLM falls into this category. I believe we have limited financial resources and we need to target them where they are most needed. Generally speaking, seniors are not in need. That does not mean we shouldn't help seniors that are in need.
Really
http://www.foodbankscanada.ca/getmedia/3b946e67-fbe2-490e-90dc-4a313dfb97e5/HungerCount2012.pdf.aspx
Section 1-page 7
7% of those helped live primarily on
income from a
pension
(rising to 9%
in small towns and rural areas).
•
8% of households assisted are
homeowners
(increasing to 16% at
small town and rural food banks)
Perhaps we should have a scenario in Canada similar to that like in the movie The Island or the movie Logan's Run.
hear-hear!!
And what's your point? It's not 3% but 7-9%? It's still a very small amount of the senior population that needs help from food banks. The way you guys are portraying seniors I would expect that 90% of seniors are going to foodbanks, the only exceptions are those that have full OAS clawback.!
Pay no mind to JLM Zipperfish. He got upset with me because I took him to task on his attacks on "the younger generations". I have no issue with seniors. I have an issue with seniors who believe I owe them something simply because they were born before 1948. JLM falls into this category. I believe we have limited financial resources and we need to target them where they are most needed. Generally speaking, seniors are not in need. That does not mean we shouldn't help seniors that are in need.
And the way you are portraying seniors is if they are all at least moderately well-off, have homes that they own outright with no mortgages, don't have kids and grandkids that they help to raise, etc. ad nauseumThe way you guys are portraying seniors I would expect that 90% of seniors are going to foodbanks, the only exceptions are those that have full OAS clawback.
lol That must make your family (assuming you have one) miss you a lot. Jeezez, even when I got my first mortgage for a house I still found time to catch a movie. These days, I watch movies off the net. Just what is it you do that requires 24/7 work?Sorry, I don't have money to go see movies or the time because I'm always at work earning my income.![]()
And what's your point? It's not 3% but 7-9%? It's still a very small amount of the senior population that needs help from food banks. The way you guys are portraying seniors I would expect that 90% of seniors are going to foodbanks, the only exceptions are those that have full OAS clawback.!
Not to point out the obvious, or maybe because it is. the 13.5% is only the OAS component of the senior payouts. If you had read the article, which I'm sure you didn't, you will see that seniors get 42% of all social benefits.
You would have read this if you saw the article but I will give it to you here because I'm sure you don't want to mess up your points with facts. But did you know that only 3% of food bank users are seniors and 50% of them are children?
I was told flat out by my financial adviser to exclude OAS from my long-term planning. Three + years out of university...and I'm being told to ignore it. It's simple mathematics though considering the demographic crunch. If it's still there it will be a bonus. The more I think about it though, the less I'm concerned about it. If it's gone it's gone, and I'm already planning for my days as a retiree without OAS.
Considering the healthcare spend, I'd rather current seniors be able to afford to live than end up in very poor health and costing more. There's lots of angles to consider here.
I was told flat out by my financial adviser to exclude OAS from my long-term planning. Three + years out of university...and I'm being told to ignore it. It's simple mathematics though considering the demographic crunch. If it's still there it will be a bonus. The more I think about it though, the less I'm concerned about it. If it's gone it's gone, and I'm already planning for my days as a retiree without OAS.
Considering the healthcare spend, I'd rather current seniors be able to afford to live than end up in very poor health and costing more. There's lots of angles to consider here.
When you simply dismiss any valid point anyone else make, the only option is to ridicule you because that's what you are, a self centered ridiculous little man!Of course, when you can't some up with valid point most bullies turn to swearing or abuse......what a surprise you do both!
You call it superannuation, the company pension called it "Bridging" until I turned 65.I lived better for 9 years without OAS but when I turned 65 and started collecting it, they cut back my superannuation. Mind you with the benefits obtained after 65 you soon get used to the difference.
Just what is it you do that requires 24/7 work?
When you simply dismiss any valid point anyone else make, the only option is to ridicule you because that's what you are, a self centered ridiculous little man!
You call it superannuation, the company pension called it "Bridging" until I turned 65.
I'm a bit older (probably a factor of 2) than you and I'm not counting on it either. CPP better be around, though, or there's gonna be a lotta parts of politicians surrounding a somewhat bloody me. lolI was told flat out by my financial adviser to exclude OAS from my long-term planning. Three + years out of university...and I'm being told to ignore it. It's simple mathematics though considering the demographic crunch. If it's still there it will be a bonus. The more I think about it though, the less I'm concerned about it. If it's gone it's gone, and I'm already planning for my days as a retiree without OAS.
Considering the healthcare spend, I'd rather current seniors be able to afford to live than end up in very poor health and costing more. There's lots of angles to consider here.
You are working and seniors are not. Not everybody had the opportunity to invest in retirement. Some lost all their investments when the crooks on Wall Street crashed the economy. Some lost their life savings to scam artists. Some were debilitated by disease or accident. There are thousands of reasons not every senior was ready to face retirement.Again, if that is such a good idea then give everyone social assistance since we could all use help with our personal rent, utility bills, car payments, increased health costs, etc.
What's the problem with that scenario?
Great post Cliff.You are working and seniors are not. Not everybody had the opportunity to invest in retirement. Some lost all their investments when the crooks on Wall Street crashed the economy. Some lost their life savings to scam artists. Some were debilitated by disease or accident. There are thousands of reasons not every senior was ready to face retirement.
Truth is, I don't care why you have a hard on for the OAS. You do not debate this subject. you spout the same silly line for over a year and ignore everybody else's input. Like most of the seniors on here, I'm sick of your one track mind and your zeal for screwing up our lives. Good day. Hope you enjoy your retirement, but don't come back here crying the blues if the economy goes in the crapper and you lose all you life saving and investments to the crooks on Wall Street. You will get no sympathy from anybody.