Governments spend too much on Seniors

[Tecumsehsbones]

Being seniors, they have earned it by building this country. Now that it is built there is little for us younger folks to do but pay homage to them by giving them stuff.

That's an excellent point. In "fairness," the young benefit massively from infrastructure they had no part in building. They are also heavily subsidised by the government, and that subsidy was paid for by the taxes paid by the people who are now seniors.

So it seems like the general notion is that you receive from the government during your young and old years, and you pay in during your working years.

Seems fair, though this or that detail could be a bit off.

 

[JLM]

I have no problem with adjusting the OAS to better reflect current issues and dropping OAS more for people according to their level of income. But just cancelling it flat out, nope; not unless CPP rates are raised to appropriately reflect pension amounts for people who have spent a large portion of their lives working.

During the time we had kids living at home, we didn't have gov'ts forking over money for babysitting, wife didn't get so many months paid maternity leave (she had to claim UI and apply for the extended UI), and so on. We didn't like what the school system was turning into so we sacrificed time and other things to partially educate the kids at home yet still paid full taxes for education and are STILL paying full taxes for education. Then we paid for half our oldest kids' post-sec ed plus half of what it cost to set her business up and about 2/3 of our other kid's post-sec ed. We've also donated a lot of time and some money to our community and charities.
Meantime gov't has killed DPSP, continually raised taxes to cover babysitting and whatever other goodies that the public wants more and more of, and has basically become a pain in the azz.

I think it balances out. People want more goodies from gov't, then pay more taxes. People want more take-home pay, then quit voting for the morons who keep boosting the size of the gov't tax vacuum and quit sucking on gov't teat for all the goodies that people demand more and more of from it. YPeople might also want to quit forking over stupid sums for seats to watch pro-sports, buying 52" plasma tvs, buying fancy 22' motorboats, buying $600 BBQs, etc. until they can reap those sorts of rewards later in life. Also, take better care of their health because it costs gov't less for healthcare and they can better enjoy the fancy 22 footer and whatnot later.

And, BTW, I don't give two craps about how much other people make or how much in taxes they pay because the rates are graduated and the more affluent people get, the more they spend on goods, services and taxes.
I also don't mind helping out people who need gov't to help them have a life in spite of the relatively few who take unfair advantage of everything, because I can accept that sh|t like that happens.
We've built a life here that does not need much from gov'ts and economic messes don't impact us much. IOW, we have become quite independent and content and we worked hard for it and whatever we are entitled to from gov't. And you want to kill the OAS we paid into all this time and won't ever collect as much as we paid into? I'd just as soon cut your fingers off so you can't post such ill-thought-out drivel.

Excellent post, Les, but don't hold your breath waiting for it to sink in. I've pounding the same message but it's like trying to penetrate granite with a wet noodle! -

 

[L Gilbert]

Yeah, well, I kinda meant to put it in the other thread.
But it still all boils down to the fact that I've spent considerable time "investing" in gov't and this putz comes along and basically says I shouldn't expect a return on the "investment" and seniors in general (complete with increasing health issues due to age and whatnot) don't need any more gov't services than 25 and 40 year olds.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Yeah, well, I kinda meant to put it in the other thread.
But it still all boils down to the fact that I've spent considerable time "investing" in gov't and this putz comes along and basically says I shouldn't expect a return on the "investment" and seniors in general (complete with increasing health issues due to age and whatnot) don't need any more gov't services than 25 and 40 year olds.

How 'bout we link the two of you? You paid for his education and part of his keep for the roughly two decades when he was nothing but a drain on society, so now he can pay for your dotage.

(The "dotage" part was a joke.)

 

[taxslave]

Using this philosophy shouldn't everyone get social assistance then to make sure everyone can afford to fish, golf and go down south for a couple of months every winter?

Only the rich retirees that are entitled to their entitlements. Most have been like that their entire lives. The ones that benifited most from deficit spending for the last 40 years.

 

[L Gilbert]

How 'bout we link the two of you? You paid for his education and part of his keep for the roughly two decades when he was nothing but a drain on society, so now he can pay for your dotage.

(The "dotage" part was a joke.)

Nope. I paid for my own dotage. He can contribute what he can towards his own assuming someone doesn't catapult him into the middle of the Pacific for coming up with idiotic ideas (and wait till he's too old to swim before they do the catapulting).

 

[tibear]

I have no problem with adjusting the OAS to better reflect current issues and dropping OAS more for people according to their level of income. But just cancelling it flat out, nope; not unless CPP rates are raised to appropriately reflect pension amounts for people who have spent a large portion of their lives working.

During the time we had kids living at home, we didn't have gov'ts forking over money for babysitting, wife didn't get so many months paid maternity leave (she had to claim UI and apply for the extended UI), and so on. We didn't like what the school system was turning into so we sacrificed time and other things to partially educate the kids at home yet still paid full taxes for education and are STILL paying full taxes for education. Then we paid for half our oldest kids' post-sec ed plus half of what it cost to set her business up and about 2/3 of our other kid's post-sec ed. We've also donated a lot of time and some money to our community and charities.
Meantime gov't has killed DPSP, continually raised taxes to cover babysitting and whatever other goodies that the public wants more and more of, and has basically become a pain in the azz.

I think it balances out. People want more goodies from gov't, then pay more taxes. People want more take-home pay, then quit voting for the morons who keep boosting the size of the gov't tax vacuum and quit sucking on gov't teat for all the goodies that people demand more and more of from it. YPeople might also want to quit forking over stupid sums for seats to watch pro-sports, buying 52" plasma tvs, buying fancy 22' motorboats, buying $600 BBQs, etc. until they can reap those sorts of rewards later in life. Also, take better care of their health because it costs gov't less for healthcare and they can better enjoy the fancy 22 footer and whatnot later.

And, BTW, I don't give two craps about how much other people make or how much in taxes they pay because the rates are graduated and the more affluent people get, the more they spend on goods, services and taxes.
I also don't mind helping out people who need gov't to help them have a life in spite of the relatively few who take unfair advantage of everything, because I can accept that sh|t like that happens.
We've built a life here that does not need much from gov'ts and economic messes don't impact us much. IOW, we have become quite independent and content and we worked hard for it and whatever we are entitled to from gov't. And you want to kill the OAS we paid into all this time and won't ever collect as much as we paid into? I'd just as soon cut your fingers off so you can't post such ill-thought-out drivel.

Some of this I agree with:
- adjusting OAS limits to meets societies needs and the recipients income level.
- "People want more goodies from gov't, then pay more taxes. People want more take-home pay, then quit voting for the morons who keep boosting the size of the gov't tax vacuum and quit sucking on gov't teat for all the goodies that people demand more and more of from it."
- the stuff about childcare, education, etc. People make choices in live and just because you want something doesn't mean that other have to pay for it.

However, even though I'm accused of repeating myself over and over again, it doesn't seem to be sinking in that "We didn't pay into OAS over the course of our life." Not one canadian has ever paid "into" OAS before they collect it. OAS is paid directly out of general revenue. OAS is NOT like CPP or UI work canadians pay into a plan and collect later. There is NO tie between CPP and OAS..NONE. CPP is something working canadians have paid for and have a right to collect. If they need more than CPP in their senior years isn't that what social assistance is for????

Not sure how many more times I will have to repeat myself but obviously the number of times so far hasn't sunk in yet......

Being seniors, they have earned it by building this country. Now that it is built there is little for us younger folks to do but pay homage to them by giving them stuff.

Well, I guess the rest of us can stop working now because our seniors have completed the job and there is nothing else to do....right?

 

[JLM]

Some of this I agree with:
- adjusting OAS limits to meets societies needs and the recipients income level.
-

How old are you? My guess is under 30 and not in imminent danger!-

 

[tibear]

Nope. I paid for my own dotage. He can contribute what he can towards his own assuming someone doesn't catapult him into the middle of the Pacific for coming up with idiotic ideas (and wait till he's too old to swim before they do the catapulting).

Perhaps you can also enlighten me on what you perceive to be a personal attack?

How old are you? My guess is under 30 and not in imminent danger!-

Again, evidently what I type isn't getting through because I've mentioned it a couple of times. I'm within 5 years of retiring.

 

[Cliffy]

Perhaps you can also enlighten me on what you perceive to be a personal attack?

What you don't get, is that you are personally attacking seniors on here that have invested their lives in this country and you want to take that investment away from them. You would have to be pretty dense not to notice how people are taking your attack personally.

 

[gerryh]

Unfortunately our society is too individualistic and really don't care about anyone but themselves.

and that is abundantly obvious by your posts.

 

[JLM]

Being seniors, they have earned it by building this country. Now that it is built there is little for us younger folks to do but pay homage to them by giving them stuff.

Not quite, the young whippersnappers have their work cut out for them maintaining what we old curmudgeons built! -

 

[tibear]

What you don't get, is that you are personally attacking seniors on here that have invested their lives in this country and you want to take that investment away from them. You would have to be pretty dense not to notice how people are taking your attack personally.

This is not a personal attack on seniors. Not once have I wished any harm on our seniors. I simply want all Canadians to get the same support that our seniors enjoy.

Quick question, did you even read the newspaper article that is reference in the opening post? I'm supporting that columnists and her sources that say that the government is unfairly support seniors because of the voting block that they represent, to the detriment of the rest of the Canadians.

Do you not acknowledge that the senior programs in place today and proposed in recent budgets but a great financial strain on the rest of Canadians? Or is your attitude simply, "As long as I get my monthly cheque I don't care what anyone has to do to pay for it."

 

[JLM]

Perhaps you can also enlighten me on what you perceive to be a personal attack?



Again, evidently what I type isn't getting through because I've mentioned it a couple of times. I'm within 5 years of retiring.

Well, you haven't learnt much in 60 years!

This is not a personal attack on seniors. Not once have I wished any harm on our seniors. I simply want all Canadians to get the same support that our seniors enjoy.

Quick question, did you even read the newspaper article that is reference in the opening post? I'm supporting that columnists and her sources that say that the government is unfairly support seniors because of the voting block that they represent, to the detriment of the rest of the Canadians.

Do you not acknowledge that the senior programs in place today and proposed in recent budgets but a great financial strain on the rest of Canadians? Or is your attitude simply, "As long as I get my monthly cheque I don't care what anyone has to do to pay for it."

So you believe what you read in the newspaper? Was it news or an editorial? As far as harming seniors is concerned, when you cut their income you cut their access to all amenities not to mention a few essentials.

 

[Cliffy]

This is not a personal attack on seniors. Not once have I wished any harm on our seniors. I simply want all Canadians to get the same support that our seniors enjoy.

Quick question, did you even read the newspaper article that is reference in the opening post? I'm supporting that columnists and her sources that say that the government is unfairly support seniors because of the voting block that they represent, to the detriment of the rest of the Canadians.

Do you not acknowledge that the senior programs in place today and proposed in recent budgets but a great financial strain on the rest of Canadians? Or is your attitude simply, "As long as I get my monthly cheque I don't care what anyone has to do to pay for it."

You are a broken record. I and Trex already made it clear that OAS is not a supplement, or a social service nor does it come from tax revenue. It does not come out of your pocket, it is not a burden on you or anybody under retirement age. You don't seem to be capable of seeing past you prejudices and preconceived notions. You have been spouting this tune on here for over a year and you have not changed your tune, nor have you listened to anybody but the voices in your head.

 

[JLM]

You are a broken record. I and Trex already made it clear that OAS is not a supplement, or a social service nor does it come from tax revenue. It does not come out of your pocket, it is not a burden on you or anybody under retirement age. You don't seem to be capable of seeing past you prejudices and preconceived notions. You have been spouting this tune on here for over a year and you have not changed your tune, nor have you listened to anybody but the voices in your head.

I'm thinking he may be a relative of the gal who was trying to sell her father's book. -

 

[tibear]

Well, you haven't learnt much in 60 years!

No surprise but I believe the exact opposite. In my life I have learned that I'm part of a great country that requires that every citizen needs to do their part. Work as hard as you can, pay your share of taxes, take care of those less fortunate than yourself, don't rely on the government to take care of you and not to take what doesn't belong to you.

I believe that most Canadians follow the same philosophy, however I must admit that I do wonder about some of the points with respect to some of the posters in this forum. Before going into depth, let's get the sick (physical&mental), abused, etc out of the question because there are people who need extra help.

Now putting those people aside do you believe that it is the responsibility of the individual or the government to provide a "healthy life" to able bodies Canadians? What makes you believe that you are "owed" money? I've asked this many times and still haven't heard anything that makes sense.....because most of the answers can be attributed to every single Canadian NOT just seniors.

Do you think that Canadians have the right to simply choose not to work if they cannot afford to survive and have the ability to physically work?

 

[Angstrom]

This is not a personal attack on seniors. Not once have I wished any harm on our seniors. I simply want all Canadians to get the same support that our seniors enjoy.

Quick question, did you even read the newspaper article that is reference in the opening post? I'm supporting that columnists and her sources that saying that the government is unfairly support seniors because of the voting block that they represent, to the detriment of the rest of the Canadians.

Do you not acknowledge that the senior programs in place today and proposed in recent budgets but a great financial strain on the rest of Canadians? Or is your attitude simply, "As long as I get my monthly cheque I don't care what anyone has to do to pay for it."

It's perfectly normal to "not care" for what happens to Canada once you are dead.

 

[tibear]

You are a broken record. I and Trex already made it clear that OAS is not a supplement, or a social service nor does it come from tax revenue. It does not come out of your pocket, it is not a burden on you or anybody under retirement age. You don't seem to be capable of seeing past you prejudices and preconceived notions. You have been spouting this tune on here for over a year and you have not changed your tune, nor have you listened to anybody but the voices in your head.

Cliffy, you're as bad as Petros because you don't know what OAS is. Directly from the OAS pamphlet:
The Old Age Security (OAS) program is the cornerstone of Canada’s retirement income system.

The OAS program is financed from the general revenues of the Government of Canada, which means you do not pay into it directly. In this way, the OAS differs from the Canada Pension Plan (CPP), which is a contributory plan that people pay into when they work. The CPP provides a range of benefits to contributors and their families, which include retirement, disability, survivor, and death benefits.

The OAS and CPP benefits, combined with retirement savings, investments, and private pension plans, provide Canadians with one of the best retirement income systems in the world.

There are four types of OAS benefits:
• the OAS pension;
• The Guaranteed Income Supplement
• the Allowance; and
• the Allowance for the Survivor.

The only part of the plan that I'm taking about is the OAS pension. I have no problem with the GIS and allowances because those are income based.

I only hope that your would be opened now that you see what the OAS plan is in black in white.

 

[Durry]

Zzzzzeeeeee just checked in;
I can't believe that after 260 posts people here still don't know the difference between OAS and CPP !!!

Man there must be a lot of dumbos here..eh !! Easterners by chance???