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

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Temp lock to do a split and, just maybe, let a couple folk reflect on how proper discussion is done here on army.ca.
We like this to be were civil discussion happens.

EDIT:...now open. Thanks,
Bruce

 

[Altair]

I think you're mixing up stages of life. Grandma (often because grandpa passed away earlier) often lived on their own till they weren't able to live alone and then moved in to be taken care off.



It's very hard to design government policy around anecdotes. There's always some story in either direction.

We should be trying to establish clear and concise goals and used data to design policies that get us there.

We have gotten to where we are because the politics of all this is very difficult in an aging society where the median voter is getting older. All major parties now cater to the oldest cohort above all else. Before the last major election, the Bloc's biggest demand from minority Liberals was a top up for older seniors for OAS. You would think it would be something about sovereignty. Nope, they just wanted a bigger cut for their voter base.

Canada is at a breaking point—the growing generational gap is a big reason why

thehub.ca

And the thing is, if this isn't at least contained while the Boomers are still here, it will actually make it all worse in the next generation. We'll end up with some feudal style wealth and income inequality that will probably tear this country apart. Heck, we're already at the point where the biggest flex in society is being able to have a second kid.

This is where the issues lie. Unless there is a baby boom, every generation that follows the last will be the one holding that wealth and political power ensuring that they keep their gains.

But because of those gains it means subsequent generations have less children. So on and so forth.

The system is built to ensure that every other government expense will be sacrificed before ever touching benefits for retirees, regardless of their wealth.

The only thing that will change this is the day where financial realities butts head with demographic realities. But looking at nations like Japan, who are limping along despite having 1 retiree for every 2 working people, I won't live to see it.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Who is spending $90k on "groceries and necessities"?

The Governor General? The PM? Everytime they get on a plane.

 

[Brad Sallows]

My wife and I have the only grand child on her side.

In our cohort of friends only 1 couple has more than 1 kid.

The collapse is coming.

Perhaps, but a lot of the discussion is confusing cause and effect in the belief that "cheaper housing -> more children".

Families are smaller because women have increasingly broad employment options and birth control is inexpensive and reliable. These two trends have been increasing for over five decades.

Housing prices are higher because families are smaller - people have more disposable income.

Housing prices got to a point at which the costs started becoming a constraint on family size also, but the fundamentals didn't go away.

Family from 20-35 and career from 35-55 is a sweet spot for those who figured it out.

 

[lenaitch]

My wife and I have the only grand child on her side.

In our cohort of friends only 1 couple has more than 1 kid.

The collapse is coming.

Same. I'm a Boomer. Married late; two careers, one kid. Daughter married late; tow careers, one (grand)kid. On my brother's side - nada. In my small lifelong circle, only one friend had more than two kids.

I don't know what data shows but, anecdotally, it seems the only group having multiple kids are immigrants. It's likely cultural but many are more inclined to live in muti-generational settings, which spreads out costs for housing, food, daycare, etc. I suspect as their Canadian born kids grow up, they will become more 'westernized' and trend to smaller families.

 

[Altair]

Same. I'm a Boomer. Married late; two careers, one kid. Daughter married late; tow careers, one (grand)kid. On my brother's side - nada. In my small lifelong circle, only one friend had more than two kids.

I don't know what data shows but, anecdotally, it seems the only group having multiple kids are immigrants. It's likely cultural but many are more inclined to live in muti-generational settings, which spreads out costs for housing, food, daycare, etc. I suspect as their Canadian born kids grow up, they will become more 'westernized' and trend to smaller families.

I think I saw somewhere that it lasts two generations.

 

[ytz]

I suspect as their Canadian born kids grow up, they will become more 'westernized' and trend to smaller families.

I think I saw somewhere that it lasts two generations.

Canadian raised immigrant here. My parents had two. I have one. My brother has two. Neither of us was even born in Canada and we're already below replacement. Who knows what our kids will do.