Time to Kill OAS??

T

tibear

Electoral Member
Jan 25, 2005
854
0
16
TenPenny said:
[/FONT]

I think his point (disguised as it is) is that, since OAS applies to everyone, not all of the recipients were 'hard working' Canadians.
Click to expand...

I've never implied that there were non-harding working canadians. I simply stated that seniors get OAS without any needs assessment, which isn't fair to non-seniors.

And before JLM which points out, yes life isn't fair, but I would hope that the policies of our government would be!

TenPenny said:
I answered that one.
Click to expand...

Really, can you please refresh my memory with why OAS should be treated differently than social assistance to the rest of canadians.
 
Dexter Sinister

Dexter Sinister

Unspecified Specialist
Oct 1, 2004
10,168
539
113
Regina, SK
I don't think killing the OAS program is a good solution, nor is raising the age of eligibility. The fix is to change the income parameters. The maximum annual benefit is about $6500, and the revenuers start clawing it back when annual income exceeds about $68,000. Anybody making $68,000 doesn't need any help from the taxpayers, that threshold is far too high. It'd take some careful actuarial research to determine a more appropriate level, but I'd bet it'd be in the $40-$50K range.
 
T

tibear

Electoral Member
Jan 25, 2005
854
0
16
TenPenny said:
I answered that one.
Click to expand...

Dexter Sinister said:
I don't think killing the OAS program is a good solution, nor is raising the age of eligibility. The fix is to change the income parameters. The maximum annual benefit is about $6500, and the revenuers start clawing it back when annual income exceeds about $68,000. Anybody making $68,000 doesn't need any help from the taxpayers, that threshold is far too high. It'd take some careful actuarial research to determine a more appropriate level, but I'd bet it'd be in the $40-$50K range.
Click to expand...

That would be a start but would the $40-50K be your minimum amount to collect OAS or maximum? I would contend that anyone making $50K a year doesn't need any OAS and a two income family making $80K doesn't need OAS.

My point from the beginning is that rather than give the money to all seniors and have a clawback that OAS should either be combined with other social assistance programs or run exactly like other social assistance programs whereby it is strictly a financial needs program that have similar needs requirements to other social programs.

Tonington said:
And from your link:
The main reason for the low poverty rate among seniors is Old Age Security plus the Guaranteed Income Supplement
​
Click to expand...

I have no problem with the GIS, in fact the OAS should be replaced with an enhanced GIS to ensure that our seniors have enough money to live on.
 
Dexter Sinister

Dexter Sinister

Unspecified Specialist
Oct 1, 2004
10,168
539
113
Regina, SK
That's more or less what I thought I said, it should be based on need and the threshold is too high, and once your income passes it you get nothing.
 
T

tibear

Electoral Member
Jan 25, 2005
854
0
16
Dexter Sinister said:
That's more or less what I thought I said, it should be based on need and the threshold is too high, and once your income passes it you get nothing.
Click to expand...

OK, the current range for the OAS clawback is about $67K - $111K and I wasn't sure whether the $40-50K was your proposed range or the minimum starting point for the clawback.
 
Tonington

Tonington

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 27, 2006
15,441
150
63
tibear said:
I have no problem with the GIS, in fact the OAS should be replaced with an enhanced GIS to ensure that our seniors have enough money to live on.
Click to expand...

GIS is a program for...seniors. I thought you wanted to get rid of targeted programs and use a one-size fits all...you certainly come across that way.
 
T

tibear

Electoral Member
Jan 25, 2005
854
0
16
TenPenny said:
Read the thread.
Click to expand...

Isn't that the classic cop-out. I did re-read all of your posts and didn't see anyway where you indicated why the two systems should be treated differently. You've indicated that it is a seniors retirement program but that doesn't indicate why it should be treated differently.

How does a starving senior warrant a different program than a starving single parent with three children or a person who has health issues which prevents them from working?
 
TenPenny

TenPenny

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 9, 2004
17,467
139
63
Location, Location
tibear said:
Isn't that the classic cop-out. I did re-read all of your posts and didn't see anyway where you indicated why the two systems should be treated differently. You've indicated that it is a seniors retirement program but that doesn't indicate why it should be treated differently.
Click to expand...

That wasn't what you asked me to clarify. Your reading comprehension isn't very good.
 
T

tibear

Electoral Member
Jan 25, 2005
854
0
16
Tonington said:
GIS is a program for...seniors. I thought you wanted to get rid of targeted programs and use a one-size fits all...you certainly come across that way.
Click to expand...

Ideally that would be the way to go. However, if we need to take baby steps to get there then using an enhanced GIS program is a better solution to what we currently have.
 
T

tibear

Electoral Member
Jan 25, 2005
854
0
16
TenPenny said:
That wasn't what you asked me to clarify. Your reading comprehension isn't very good.
Click to expand...

History of posts:
Me - the money is for poor seniors ( my question is why are they treated differently than other poor canadians?)
​
You - I answered that one.

Me - Really, can you please refresh my memory with why OAS should be treated differently than social assistance to the rest of canadians.

You - Read the thread.

Me - Isn't that the classic cop-out. I did re-read all of your posts and didn't see anyway where you indicated why the two systems should be treated differently. You've indicated that it is a seniors retirement program but that doesn't indicate why it should be treated differently.

How does a starving senior warrant a different program than a starving single parent with three children or a person who has health issues which prevents them from working?

You - That wasn't what you asked me to clarify. Your reading comprehension isn't very good.


Getting back to the first post the question was "my question is why are they treated differently than other poor canadians" and the last question was "How does a starving senior warrant a different program than a starving single parent with three children or a person who has health issues which prevents them from working?".

You claim I asked you two different questions, perhaps it is the pot that doesn't understand english.

I haven't seen anything from you to show the reason why starving seniors need a different program than other starving canadians. Please try to convince me with real facts and discussion points.
 
TenPenny

TenPenny

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 9, 2004
17,467
139
63
Location, Location
tibear said:
Me - the money is for poor seniors ( my question is why are they treated differently than other poor canadians?)
​

Me - Really, can you please refresh my memory with why OAS should be treated differently than social assistance to the rest of canadians.
Click to expand...

You just don't get it. Your reading comprehension is terrible.

Read the two sentences OF YOURS that I quoted, above.

You're asking two different things, and as I said, I answered the first one that you asked.

If you can't understand your own questions, you surely won't understand the answers.
 
T

tibear

Electoral Member
Jan 25, 2005
854
0
16
TenPenny said:
You just don't get it. Your reading comprehension is terrible.

Read the two sentences OF YOURS that I quoted, above.

You're asking two different things, and as I said, I answered the first one that you asked.

If you can't understand your own questions, you surely won't understand the answers.
Click to expand...

Classic misdirection and personal attack when you don't have a leg to stand on in a debate.

Perhaps for my simple mind, you should claerly point out to me what the two "different" questions were and what your answer was.
 
TenPenny

TenPenny

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 9, 2004
17,467
139
63
Location, Location
tibear said:
Classic misdirection and personal attack when you don't have a leg to stand on in a debate.

Perhaps for my simple mind, you should claerly point out to me what the two "different" questions were and what your answer was.
Click to expand...

You originally asked 'why'

Then you decided to pretend you asked 'why should'

Two different questions, and you accuse me of misdirection? You can't even understand what the difference is.

Why do you beat your wife?
Why should you beat your wife?

You're obviously swimming in waters that you're not capable of, go back to watching Wizards of Waverly Place.
 
T

tibear

Electoral Member
Jan 25, 2005
854
0
16
TenPenny said:
You originally asked 'why'

Then you decided to pretend you asked 'why should'

Two different questions, and you accuse me of misdirection? You can't even understand what the difference is.

Why do you beat your wife?
Why should you beat your wife?

You're obviously swimming in waters that you're not capable of, go back to watching Wizards of Waverly Place.
Click to expand...

Fair enough:

If OAS is a seniors income assistance program, why are seniors different than other people on other income assistant programs?

Similarly,

Why should seniors be treated differently than other canadians who collect income assistance?

Please don't say, I answered and walk away, it only makes you look small and petty.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom