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

[Czech_pivo]

There is a divergence that needs to happen. At some point we have to focus on the future of this country.

Arguably this is the big sacrifice that the boomers may be forced/asked to make. Which its less entitlement to their entitlements and more how can they leave a better country for their kids, grandkids ect ect ect.

That assumes that the kids and grandkids have the ability and understanding not to piss away the inheritances that their parents and grandparents 'might' leave them. I see little across my kids inner and outer friends circle that leads me to believe that they have any understanding of 'delayed gratification' or 'living within or under their means.'

We've already told our kids, 20yr and 18yr, not expect much of a pot of gold awaiting them when my wife and I pass. We've made it clear to them that our job was to feed them, educate them and to provide them with a safe and loving environment so that they will be ready to tackle the world and whatever comes their way. We will not be paying for a lifestyle that they see on Instagram or TikTok, our parents gave us the same that we gave you, its up to you to make your own way, and if that means my kids leave Canada for better opportunities elsewhere, so be it. Our retirement plans focus on running down our assets to pretty much zero by the time we fulfill the actuary tables. All that will be left is the house, so they will receive something substantial but it certainly won't be the pot of gold that my wife and I look to spend on our retirement.

 

[Altair]

I believe in cold water medicine. If things aren't working for people they need to vote with their feet. If a country wants its citizens to be patriotic and committed to it; then the country should be patriotic and committed about its citizens and create an environment for them to thrive and grow.

If its not doing that the people should move. Just like our ancestors did, in search of a better future. Human migration is timeless.

There should be a plebiscite.

Then the government could say the people forced their hands.

And for the get rid of OAS or reform it campaign, just run nonstop ads to millennial and zoomers that 2 people aged 65 and older making 90k each get 100 percent of their OAS meanwhile two working age parents each making 50k and needing to juggle kids get it clawed back.

Not to mention if you're a young person without kids, then you just get nothing.

It would pass.

 

[Czech_pivo]

There should be a plebiscite.

Then the government could say the people forced their hands.

And for the get rid of OAS or reform it campaign, just run nonstop ads to millennial and zoomers that 2 people aged 65 and older making 90k each get 100 percent of their OAS meanwhile two working age parents each making 50k and needing to juggle kids get it clawed back.

Not to mention if you're a young person without kids, then you just get nothing.

It would pass.

Careful - because those 2 people aged 65 making 90k fall just about into that top 20% that pays 65% of ALL income tax in Canada. What needs to be realised is that if you remove 9k/yr from each of those people 65yr old that you now drop them into the next 40% bracket of people who only pay roughly 35% of income taxes. Remove enough people from that Top 20% of earners and you effectively will have to deal with a shortfall in income tax revenues that will have to be made up somewhere else......

EDIT:
Remember OAS is a taxable benefit. A person pays income tax on the amount of OAS that they receive. Those earning 90K or above are typically being taxed at the highest or 2nd highest progressive tax bracket in Canada.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Dear god, the balanced budgets we would have without OAS.

The infrastructure we could build. The money we could give young people to buy and built houses. Heck, people might start having kids again.

On can dream.

"Give"......hmmmm

 

[Altair]

Careful - because those 2 people aged 65 making 90k fall just about into that top 20% that pays 65% of ALL income tax in Canada. What needs to be realised is that if you remove 9k/yr from each of those people 65yr old that you now drop them into the next 40% bracket of people who only pay roughly 35% of income taxes. Remove enough people from that Top 20% of earners and you effectively will have to deal with a shortfall in income tax revenues that will have to be made up somewhere else......

EDIT:
Remember OAS is a taxable benefit. A person pays income tax on the amount of OAS that they receive. Those earning 90K or above are typically being taxed at the highest or 2nd highest progressive tax bracket in Canada.

Somehow, i think that get more in OAS than they pay in taxes that they pay on OAS so Canada still comes out ahead.

 

[Altair]

"Give"......hmmmm

OAS costs in the budget. 83b

CCB costs in the budget. 31b

Yes, give.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Somehow, i think that get more in OAS than they pay in taxes that they pay on OAS so Canada still comes out ahead.

You think so?
You are reducing their spend ability by 9k. So that means the general income revenue stream is going to lose 1/3 of that (rough math), so they now pay 3k less in taxes. The other 6k they would spend ‘out and about’ town at the local restaurants, florist, donations to Church and Hospice, lawn maintenance, clothing stores, butcher, etc, etc, etc. So all of these places will now take a hit in their revenue. Which, in turn, means that they will hire less teenagers and part time staff, they will pay less in taxes, their payroll, HST, corporate taxes, etc, etc. Do you understand the knock on effect?

Don’t expect these Seniors to pull more money out of their retirement plans to cover the less of 9k a year, no way. These are the people who grew up understanding the meaning of ‘delayed gratification’ and ‘living below one’s means’, I mean how else did they get to where they are today? They will cut back on their expenses - the items I’ve listed above - well before they decide to pull more out of their pot of gold.

 

[Altair]

You think so?
You are reducing their spend ability by 9k. So that means the general income revenue stream is going to lose 1/3 of that (rough math), so they now pay 3k less in taxes. The other 6k they would spend ‘out and about’ town at the local restaurants, florist, donations to Church and Hospice, lawn maintenance, clothing stores, butcher, etc, etc, etc. So all of these places will now take a hit in their revenue. Which, in turn, means that they will hire less teenagers and part time staff, they will pay less in taxes, their payroll, HST, corporate taxes, etc, etc. Do you understand the knock on effect?

Don’t expect these Seniors to pull more money out of their retirement plans to cover the less of 9k a year, no way. These are the people who grew up understanding the meaning of ‘delayed gratification’ and ‘living below one’s means’, I mean how else did they get to where they are today? They will cut back on their expenses - the items I’ve listed above - well before they decide to pull more out of their pot of gold.

Cool.

Give it to young people. Under 40, under 35, under 30, whatever.

Turns out they can spend too.

Or better yet, spend it on durable infrastructure.

Spend it on innovation and productivity.

Spend it on defense industries here at home.

Spend it on balanced budgets so the debt per gdp ration drops and we have less money spent on interest payments. And more money to spend on the above.

Money is fluid, it doesnt need to be spent on some of the wealthiest canadians for it to be productive in the economy.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Cool.

Give it to young people. Under 40, under 35, under 30, whatever.

Turns out they can spend too.

Or better yet, spend it on durable infrastructure.

Spend it on innovation and productivity.

Spend it on defense industries here at home.

Spend it on balanced budgets so the debt per gdp ration drops and we have less money spent on interest payments. And more money to spend on the above.

Money is fluid, it doesnt need to be spent on some of the wealthiest canadians for it to be productive in the economy.

What f$ck is this ‘give’ mentality? Why do we (the government) have to ‘give’ anyone anything?

I’m onside with the reduction and killing of the OAS over time, my approach is a general roll down of it completely but a rolling up of an expansion of the CPP and GIS (based on assets not income) to offset it.

This attacking those over 65 who are well off and who most likely fell into the top 20%, who most likely paid 65% of all income taxes in Canada their entire life is ludicrous. OAS was made to be equitable for all Canadians, just like Health Care, where we all got the samething regardless of our income level. But now, nope, not the case. Maybe we should go down the path that those that can pay for quicker and better healthcare access should be allowed, I mean I’m already carrying 40% of the population on my back now.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

. Maybe we should go down the path that those that can pay for quicker and better healthcare access should be allowed, I mean I’m already carrying 40% of the population on my back now.

That ship has long sailed, only the fallacy remains....think William Nylander waits 7 months for an MRI on his knee?

 

[Halifax Tar]

That assumes that the kids and grandkids have the ability and understanding not to piss away the inheritances that their parents and grandparents 'might' leave them. I see little across my kids inner and outer friends circle that leads me to believe that they have any understanding of 'delayed gratification' or 'living within or under their means.'

I mean are you really pitting the potential financial responsibility of on coming generations verses the actual fiscal situation situations they are being left by the out going ?

Thing's aren't good, and it 100% from the greed and poor fiscal management and planning by the outgoing generations.

As I said before a divergence is coming and we will have to focus on our future.

If you're retired and making 90+K, you should not be getting Gov support, all stop.

 

[ytz]

As a side note, places like Portugal, Spain, France, Costa Rica, Panama have all made it pretty straightforward and easy to get residency for retired seniors. Canada needs to be very careful on how they remove/reduce OAS and such going forward, otherwise they will lose more of their cash cows and golden goose’s. We wouldn’t want that top 20% shrinking and the remaining 60% to be forced to pay more than 35-40% of the income taxes burden.

Seniors are mostly a net loss from the government's perspective. Healthcare costs keep rolling in. And the taxes they pay actually go down. The Cash Cows and Golden Geese you are talking about don't really care about OAS. They are essentially wealthy folks fleeing taxes. I would bet the government would be just fine if a senior making less than $100k decided to take their healthcare bills to Portugal.

 

[Altair]

What f$ck is this ‘give’ mentality? Why do we (the government) have to ‘give’ anyone anything?

I listed 5 initiatives to spend the savings on.

You look inside yourself to figure out why you homed in on the one that "gives the money away"

I’m onside with the reduction and killing of the OAS over time, my approach is a general roll down of it completely but a rolling up of an expansion of the CPP and GIS (based on assets not income) to offset it.

No. Stop it. Stop offsetting it. Enough. If we are going to do it, it should not be a shell game.

This attacking those over 65 who are well off and who most likely fell into the top 20%, who most likely paid 65% of all income taxes in Canada their entire life is ludicrous.

Oh come on. You are all acting like there isn't already a cutoff point. So clearly someone decided that not everyone qualifies due to income. We are just haggling over where it should be.

OAS was made to be equitable for all Canadians, just like Health Care, where we all got the samething regardless of our income level. But now, nope, not the case. Maybe we should go down the path that those that can pay for quicker and better healthcare access should be allowed, I mean I’m already carrying 40% of the population on my back now.

OAS was also brought in at a time when people didn't live we'll into their 80s.

Times change. Situations change. Adapt or fall behind, adapt or sink.

OAS will grow to over 100b by 2030. Clearly something needs to give.

 

[ytz]

I believe in cold water medicine. If things aren't working for people then they need to vote with their feet. If a country wants its citizens to be patriotic and committed to it; then the country should be patriotic and committed about its citizens and create an environment for them to thrive and grow.

If its not doing that the people should move. Just like our ancestors did, in search of a better future. Human migration is timeless.

And they do. But for all this talk about old people leaving, it's not them leaving. That's mostly an empty threat. Young and talented though are leaving. I believe there was one estimate that said more than 40% of grads from the top 5 engineering schools in the country ended up in Silicon Valley. Places like Waterloo are essentialy prep schools for the Valley now. So much so that you have politicians and business people who keep musing about departure taxes on young people to try and stop them.

Ex-Google CFO proposes $500K departure tax for educated Canadians who move abroad for school or work

A Montreal-born tech billionaire is calling out a system that let him leave — and he thinks it's time to make departing Canadians pay

ca.finance.yahoo.com

I don't see anybody talking about a departure tax on a senior who wants to retire in Mexico.

 

[Czech_pivo]

If you're retired and making 90+K, you should not be getting Gov support, all stop.

I don't disagree with you but the approach needs to be a general roll down of OAS and a revamp of CPP and GIS. I've laid out possible 'how' to do this and 'why' to do is gradual elsewhere on here.

 

[Halifax Tar]

And they do. But for all this talk about old people leaving, it's not them leaving. That's mostly an empty threat. Young and talented though are leaving. So much so that you have politicians and business people who keep musing about departure taxes on young people to try and stop them.

Ex-Google CFO proposes $500K departure tax for educated Canadians who move abroad for school or work

A Montreal-born tech billionaire is calling out a system that let him leave — and he thinks it's time to make departing Canadians pay

ca.finance.yahoo.com

I don't see anybody talking about a departure tax on a senior who wants to retire in Mexico.

Old/Retired leaving is not a problem, in fact I would encourage it. Young/working leaving is, and we need to investigate why and adjust accordingly.

That's how I see it.

 

[Altair]

Old people leaving and selling their houses or giving it to their kids would also free up the housing market.

Where can we make this a policy?

 

[ytz]

Fastest way to a balanced budget is to give Grandma a ticket to Mexico instead of a OAS. I'm only being half facetious.....

 

[Halifax Tar]

Old people leaving and selling their houses or giving it to their kids would also free up the housing market.

Where can we make this a policy?

Its a win all over the place.

And you know what ? I want my twilight years to be spent in sand and sun too! Not shoveling out from a nor'easter.

 

[ytz]

I don't disagree with you but the approach needs to be a general roll down of OAS and a revamp of CPP and GIS. I've laid out possible 'how' to do this and 'why' to do is gradual elsewhere on here.

Nothing needs to be tied together. If we don't think parents with more than $90k (who actually have extra mouths to feed) should get CCB, then the same logic should be applied to seniors and OAS.

Funny how so many supposed fiscal conservatives are every ready to defend getting their pogey.