Seniors Benefits Discussion- split from Liberal (Minority/Majority) Government 2025 - ???

[mariomike]

This is why I advocate for free education, especially if it has a job in a related field at the end.

Ontario will cover the cost of tuition , compulsory fees , books , and other direct educational costs (for example, supplies, equipment) for Paramedic students - if they are willing to work in the North Region of the Province - for a period of time.

 

[YZT580]

So not the "biggest drain" that you previously asserted.

Maybe go to credible sources before taking Facebook forwards at face value.

I did and I dont' use face book. The figures still speak for themselves and they were confirmed through more than one source. Interesting the lessons that you have absorbed from the CBC and the like. Making a partial quote when the balance of the quote doesn't totally support your position whilst knowing that people generally don't go back and confirm for themselves. They/we generally accept what people write. The whole quote was not the biggest drain (written in acknowledgement of your statement) Not an overwhelming figure but it is significant. and it is 3X greater than the total GIS figure

 

[Brad Sallows]

So what do you call OAS then? Take food away from a working family and give it to someone making well above that working families income just because they happened to live in Canada for 10 years fund?

We give 9150$ a year to individuals making 93k a year over 65. If we can afford to do that we can easily afford to send people to school for things which will actively benefit our society.

No-one is taking food away. OAS has been around for a long time, throughout which deficits have been paid by borrowing. We had a prolonged period of fiscal surplus during which we were in effect paying for all the promises we made to ourselves in real-time, and paying down the accumulated borrowing of the past. We were even introducing new programs. Income tax rates went down.

People eligible to vote in 2015 changed all that. We entered a period of even more new programs, and the government-to-be openly said during the election it was going to blow away the surplus to do so. Income tax rates for lower incomes remained down, and some new rates for the highest earners were introduced - I suppose we've been taking their food away. Wags at the time claimed that younger people turned out in larger numbers than usual to vote for legalized marijuana, but deficits and new program spending were part of that package. Those who enjoy playing an inter-generational blame game will have to accept that is part of the playing surface.

Some of the new programs amounted to transfers to younger people with families, paid for mostly with more borrowing.

So some desired increases in transfers to younger people have indeed happened, and one way or another the funds to pay them are being found.

The question is whether more stringent means testing for OAS should be treated as an alternative way of paying for other existing programs, or "new money". I favour the former. I have no doubt some people, particularly on the political left, will try to frame it as the latter. If any savings from OAS reform are eaten by new demands, and the new demands (and borrowing) continue to accumulate year after year, there will indeed be a point of collapse.

I see no point in prolonging the misery of the country if it's just going to be a bunch of people clamouring for money from somewhere other than themselves and willing to borrow itself into ruin.

 

[mariomike]

From what I have read though our biggest drain other than supporting the U.N. is immigrants who aren't able to work due education or age or have to take minimum wage jobs which we then subsidize.

I ride a lot of taxis in our burg.

I was delighted to read robo-taxis are coming to town.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/waymo-uber-taxi-toronto-business-9.7392077

However, our newly re-elected mayor's spokesperson says , "The mayor will not support Waymo if it costs jobs."

 

[Czech_pivo]

Ontario will cover the cost of tuition , compulsory fees , books , and other direct educational costs (for example, supplies, equipment) for Paramedic students - if they are willing to work in the North Region of the Province - for a period of time.

View attachment 102849

So save about less than 20k all in to go from say # 13 or # 2 or #23 or #9 to work/live in #15 or #1 or #16 for how many years?

 

[mariomike]

So save about less than 20k all in to go from say # 13 or # 2 or #23 or #9 to work/live in #15 or #1 or #16 for how many years?

This is what it says,

Ontario Learn and Stay Grant for Health Human Resources

Apply for funding to cover the costs of tuition, books and other direct educational expenses for health human resources programs.

www.ontario.ca

As part of the agreement, you must work in the same service region where you studied for at least 180 days (6 months) for every full year of study funded by the grant.

 

[ytz]

I did and I dont' use face book. The figures still speak for themselves and they were confirmed through more than one source. Interesting the lessons that you have absorbed from the CBC and the like. Making a partial quote when the balance of the quote doesn't totally support your position whilst knowing that people generally don't go back and confirm for themselves. They/we generally accept what people write. The whole quote was not the biggest drain (written in acknowledgement of your statement) Not an overwhelming figure but it is significant. and it is 3X greater than the total GIS figure

There's no debate over GIS. You will notice above that I have said GIS should be increased. The debate is over OAS which is about three quarters of nearly $90B OAS/GIS line item budgeted for this Fiscal Year.

Sure, if you want to complain about how much is spent on immigrants, go ahead. But you should acknowledge that it's practically a rounding error on the federal budget. And is a red herring when it comes to addressing the core fiscal gap and imbalances. Compared to the more than $65B spent on OAS alone, the total IRCC departmental budget is $4.42B of which $3.4B is budgeted for "Immigrant and Refugee Selection and Integration" for this Fiscal. So you can try to pretend that it's all those foreigners driving up the deficit. Facts say otherwise.

Any other Facebook conspiracies you'd like fact checked?

 

[YZT580]

There's no debate over GIS. You will notice above that I have said GIS should be increased. The debate is over OAS which is about three quarters of nearly $90B OAS/GIS line item budgeted for this Fiscal Year.

Sure, if you want to complain about how much is spent on immigrants, go ahead. But you should acknowledge that it's practically a rounding error on the federal budget. And is a red herring when it comes to addressing the core fiscal gap and imbalances. Compared to the more than $65B spent on OAS alone, the total IRCC departmental budget is $4.42B of which $3.4B is budgeted for "Immigrant and Refugee Selection and Integration" for this Fiscal. So you can try to pretend that it's all those foreigners driving up the deficit. Facts say otherwise.

Any other Facebook conspiracies you'd like fact checked?

once again you have demonstrated that you don't bother reading people's replies. I don't do facebook. Full stop. But when you examine the budget there are a lot of rounding errors that add up to one hell of a lot of money. Anything over 1% is no longer a rounding error anyways it is a significant amount of money that should be spent wisely. I don't really need the OAS and I contribute far more than that back to the less fortunate population every year but you know the best thing about doing that: I get to select the organisation or individual who I believe will use it to benefit those I can't help otherwise instead of trusting the government to distribute it to their advantage. Because you know that if they lower the OAS qualification figure they won't even pay the difference towards the deficit they will spend it on something new.

 

[Eaglelord17]

All I did was mention its wrong to call education free.
Amazing how the nerve hurts when it's your entitlement belief.....

Considering I would not directly benefit from this other than having people with the skills we need in society trained to do so without a huge debt load over their head, I am fairly unbiased on this. If anything it would financially hurt me for the benefit of society.

OAS cuts would also harm me in the future, but someone needs to make the adult decision and stop paying welfare to the wealthy.

 

[Czech_pivo]

OAS cuts would also harm me in the future, but someone needs to make the adult decision and stop paying welfare to the wealthy.

The savings should be put directly to the bottom line of the ledger and pay the debt and reduce the deficit. What's economic point of just shifting the money over from one segment of society to another? How does that in any way benefit the entire country and its economic future? It simply doesn't.

If the OAS is going to be reduced or exclude a segment of the senior citizen population, then in order to benefit all individuals the debt/deficit should be paid down. If should not be the strengthening of the case that 20% of the population continues to carry 65% of the overall tax burden of society. Paid down the debt.