That response like your "red negs" is pretty much conclusive proof you have nothing intelligent to say about the matter, not that I would expect you to have anything intelligent to say about ANY matter! -
Seniors and the generation spending gap
- Thread starter SLM
- Start date
That response like your "red negs" is pretty much conclusive proof you have nothing intelligent to say about the matter, not that I would expect you to have anything intelligent to say about ANY matter! -
You could always start a thread about the other generations and their retirement plans and options. This one is about the current generation of seniors. I do understand why you want to change the subject. This one is a little embarrassing for some seniors and it's probably why very few on this thread have bothered to debate the points made. The only one that's even tried (and failed miserably) is JLM but he doesn't really fit in with the majority of seniors. He admits to owing 100k on a house worth 200k so he's either had a lot of bad luck or made some piss poor choices. Don't get me wrong, I have no problem helping out those that have not made good decisions. I am a big supporter of welfare (for instance). The point of the article is that the overwhelming majority of seniors are much better off than JLM and don't need the extra help.....especially since we are running deficits. Borrowing money to pay for programs that are not required and sticking somebody else with the bill is just plain selfish anyway you want to slice it.
Well, you've named four out of hundreds, three of which are seldom if ever here! -
If somebody doesn't shoot him! -
Lolz
That response like your "red negs" is pretty much conclusive proof you have nothing intelligent to say about the matter, not that I would expect you to have anything intelligent to say about ANY matter! -
Lolz
Another one of your diatribes underlining your crass ignorance. Who in their right mind is in hurry to pay off a debt with interest payments of 2.6% when I can invest the same money at 6% - 10%. You should stick to matters you can handle like law and order in the girls' sandbox.
Seniors and the generation spending gap
Why are we doing so much to try to help seniors when they’re already the wealthiest generation in history?
Tamsin McMahon
September 6, 2014
At age 89, Larry South would have been forgiven if he had chosen to retire on a sunny beach in Florida. Instead, the former MPP from Kingston, Ont., recently embarked on a political battle to overhaul the municipal property tax system. South had been growing increasingly concerned that elderly homeowners on fixed incomes were struggling to cope with rising property taxes because of the soaring value of their homes, while at the same time he fretted that young workers, with their stagnant wages, were being shut out of the housing market. And so South proposed replacing property taxes with a tax equal to 4.5 per cent of a homeowner’s yearly household income. Doing so would make it easier for young workers to afford the cost of owning a home, while struggling seniors, he believed, would be the biggest beneficiaries.
More: Seniors and the generation spending gap - Macleans.ca
S.L.M. - I think you have a valid subject for discussion if it can be discussed in a sane and logical manner without disparaging remarks from the peanut gallery.
1. Not all seniors are prosperous, some are but most aren't. The ones who are get most of their benefits clawed back on their income tax.
2. You are making a comparison between what seniors today have and young people of today have. The correct comparison would be between what young people have today and what we had when we were their age.
3. Before tarring all wealthy seniors with the same brush and not so wealthy seniors as far as that goes, it should be remembered that many seniors make generous donations of both time and money to charities.
4. Some wealthy and not so wealthy seniors create employment in the community hiring house cleaners, chauffers, taxis, carpenters, window cleaners etc. etc. etc.
5. To attack an entire demographic carte blanche as one illustrious poster is inclined to do just annoys people and does nothing to resolve the issue.
I'm quite willing to listen to any sensible and reasonable feedback but I won't accept CRAP from anyone.
Good topic, S.L.M.
You're wrong. Why would you persist in advertising your ignorance? Most elderly people spent their lives working at average paying jobs while raising a family, paying a mortgage and some paying for their kids to attend college. How could they possibly be wealthy? Besides that you're rude, I was speaking to S.L.M. I'm sure everyone has heard more than enough from you and don't particularly like seeing a thread hi jacked. So maybe if you shut up for a while, other posters maybe able to jam in some sensible comments.
What struck me the most about the article was the opening piece relating to the notion of reworking the property tax assessment in an effort to not only assist young people in being able to enter the housing market but also to benefit those seniors who were struggling despite the current credits afforded to them. The backlash to that proposal struck me as backlash from those only interested in maintaining the status quo, and that, in a nutshell, is what makes the topic worthy of discussion. In my opinion.
Personally I have no interest in taking anything away from anyone, especially if they've worked for it. More power to them I say. And I'm not willing to leave anyone in a more precarious situation than they were previously in. But there is some merit in reopening the debate of allowing age alone to determine what many of these societal benefits are. One has to realize of course that most of these programs and benefits were designed at a time when it was pretty conclusive that retired individuals were generally in one of the worst financial positions of any group within society. If that's no longer the case, and in many cases there are good arguments that it's not, then revisiting the criteria for programs and benefits is not a bad idea. Because it's not about taking things away from seniors, it's about leveling the playing field based on a new reality.
What's your definition of a "solid gold pension" and how does it relate to the topic at hand?
A lotofolser people are asset rich and cash poor. The modest house they spent a considerable part of their working lives paying for may nowbe worth mega bucks, which they must pay taxes on but to realize any profit they would haveto uproot and moveto a depressed area which in turn has the unfortunate consiquence of upping property valuesfor the locals there.
Perhaps some of you people would be a little bit more credible if you actually providing something other than your opinions to back up your claims.
Defined benifit plan wholey or partly paid for by taxpayers. Especially when they qualify at age 60. Those are the rich retirees which in case you have forgotten is the topic at hand.
Wow!!! You must really be struggling if you consider that "gold plated".
Btw, I wonder how people would feel about giving welfare payments to a single mother living in a paid for house worth 2 million?
I totally agree with you that extending discounts to seniors carte blanche is a thing that is now obsolete. I also pointed out some years ago on this forum that seniors born post depression are a different bunch than those born pre depression. I, myself do not need these discounts to get by but like everything else it's natural to take what you can get. I just pass it forward by doing stuff like contributing to the food bank at Xmas and other times. As I've said, S.L.M. I'm in agreement with most of what you've said if not all, what I am in disagreement with is some raving lunatic hi jacking your thread by attacking an entire generation and characterizing them as selfish, greedy people. I know I lose patience quite quickly with people like Cannuck, when I should just laugh at them realizing they really for their own protection should be in an institution. I know some pretty fit "young" seniors who would take his head off in a Hollywood minute. -
Like always you are delusional and missing the point. How many single mothers on welfare live in a house worth $2 million. Send me the list. I can see a situation where a couple has split up the mother has wound up in possession of the family home, so (on paper, she's worth a bit of money) but what part of the house is she and her kids able to eat? I would agree in normal circumstances she should be made to sell the home and rent a condo, but the problem that solution doesn't always work in the real world.
You're the idiot who started out making the claims. YOU back them up! Names, addresses and the "bottom line" on the income tax forms will do!
When you say Gov't employee you are talking about 2 different groups, one is politicians who can retire after 6 years and the other are normal working stiffs who contributed 5% of their pay for 35 years in order to qualify for a full pension. As one of the latter I can attest to the fact that for the first ten years I worked for a wage below that paid to the private sector in exchange for better job security. People in my situation certainly didn't become rich (unless they had an inheritance).