Canadian pensions

[Topaz]

Are any of you aware that the Finance Minister is holding talks about pensions for Canadians and what can or should be done to help Canadians that don't have a pension plan? In Ontario, a lot of the layed off workers are having to dip into their RRSP's to keep their head above water, especially if they are on EI and can't find work or are being trained. I think the government should make a law that all businesses that pay into pension plan are force to make sure the pensions are there for the workers. In other words , whatever the politicans get I see only fair for Canadians to get also. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/ottawa-provinces-ready-to-face-off-on-pensions/article1404728/

[August1991]

Are any of you aware that the Finance Minister is holding talks about pensions for Canadians and what can or should be done to help Canadians that don't have a pension plan?

Why don't they have a pension plan?

I think the government should make a law that all businesses that pay into pension plan are force to make sure the pensions are there for the workers. In other words , whatever the politicans get I see only fair for Canadians to get also.

IOW, you think the State should make us all responsible for the decisions of others.

That social organization was tried in the Soviet Union and it was an utter failure.

----

The bottom line, Topaz, is that we are often responsible for our individual decisions. If a person makes bad decisions, there is no conceivable insurance scheme to protect them from their mistakes.

[Bugs]

I don't think that's the situation, Topaz.

I don't deny there's a certain amount of suffering out there because of job losses, but outside of auto and timber workers the job losses haven't been that serious. I don't think this article isn't speaking about autoworkers, who, after all, have more benefits than any other workers in the private sector.

They are talking about people who don't have pensions of any kind, beyond CPP, the way I see it. The CPP just isn't adequate, and they are probably looking for various incentives they can use to make it smart to have some other source of income.

[August1991]

They are talking about people who don't have pensions of any kind, beyond CPP, the way I see it. The CPP just isn't adequate, and they are probably looking for various incentives they can use to make it smart to have some other source of income.

Bugs, you raise a good point. The CPP/OAP/GAINS are a basic minimum and as a civilized society, we can surely do this.

But beyond this, we cannot (should not) protect people from their own bad decisions.

[Riverwind]

Bugs, you raise a good point. The CPP/OAP/GAINS are a basic minimum and as a civilized society, we can surely do this.

I oppose any changes to CPP because what they will do is front load it give the baby boomers way more than they deserve based on their remaining contributions and leave it up to the following generations to pay the bill.

[Wilber]

I oppose any changes to CPP because what they will do is front load it give the baby boomers way more than they deserve based on their remaining contributions and leave it up to the following generations to pay the bill.

CPP was always front loaded. Just look at what pre boomers are getting out of it vs what they put in compared to those retiring today. The boomers have just forced it to start dealing with reality.

[Riverwind]

CPP was always front loaded. Just look at what pre boomers are getting out of it vs what they put in compared to those retiring today. The boomers have just forced it to start dealing with reality.

I know - but what is done is done. That does not make it right to repeat the mistake.

[whowhere]

Are any of you aware that the Finance Minister is holding talks about pensions for Canadians and what can or should be done to help Canadians that don't have a pension plan? In Ontario, a lot of the layed off workers are having to dip into their RRSP's to keep their head above water, especially if they are on EI and can't find work or are being trained. I think the government should make a law that all businesses that pay into pension plan are force to make sure the pensions are there for the workers. In other words , whatever the politicans get I see only fair for Canadians to get also. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/ottawa-provinces-ready-to-face-off-on-pensions/article1404728/

What are you talking about? Pensions are for people over 65. What does EI and RRSPs have to do with retirees? As for your whine and cheese, welcome to capitalism 101, are you people new? You have do whatever you need to do preserve your wealth and accumulate it. And you are right about politicians. They should get what Canadians get, cpp or RRSPs, nothing different.

[August1991]

I oppose any changes to CPP because what they will do is front load it give the baby boomers way more than they deserve based on their remaining contributions and leave it up to the following generations to pay the bill.

Riverwind, you are naive. You don't know how taxes or benefits are determined.

Look how the CPP contribution/payroll tax rose, RRSP regime changed; income trusts were eliminated and the Feds created TFSAs. As politicians seek votes, I would expect greater changes in our tax/pension regime.

What are you talking about? Pensions are for people over 65. What does EI and RRSPs have to do with retirees?

Uh, everything?

Whowhere, I think I speak for others when I say that you are probably clueless about these issues.

[blueblood]

I oppose any changes to CPP because what they will do is front load it give the baby boomers way more than they deserve based on their remaining contributions and leave it up to the following generations to pay the bill.

I think with the advent of the RRSP and now the TFSA's the writing is on the wall, both Liberals and Conservatives are planning on getting out of the "retirement business" There will simply be way too many retired people and not enough taxpayers. Either taxes would have to go up to pay for all these retired people, or something is going to have to go...

Looks like people are going to have to take care of their own retirement as it should be.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

I certainly don't see the government backing out of retirement planning. In fact I see what appears to be the opposite, from what I understand a Canadian version of the American 401K will be created to supplement existing RRSP's, CPP's, RPP's and OS's. The cost to the government will be in reduced revenues realized with personal income tax deductions for the new plan.

[Topaz]

What are you talking about? Pensions are for people over 65. What does EI and RRSPs have to do with retirees? As for your whine and cheese, welcome to capitalism 101, are you people new? You have do whatever you need to do preserve your wealth and accumulate it. And you are right about politicians. They should get what Canadians get, cpp or RRSPs, nothing different.

What I am saying that there are people who put money away in RRSP's and because they lost their jobs, mainly because of government polices, they are forced onto EI, which isn't much, so they have to go to their RRSP's to help pay the bills or lose their homes and be homeless. Sure they can get other jobs but if they live in an area that doesn't have jobs then there's training, which will only really help if you are under a certain age. IF you are 60, you can get CPP, which may be as much as EI. SO, when the government starts to worry about people not having a retirement savings, I'm saying some that have saved are using it NOW to survive! Politicans will NEVER have to worry about their retirement because the taxpayers, even the ones who won't have a secure retirement, are paying for it!! Lesson, become as politican, just for the retirement!!

[blueblood]

I certainly don't see the government backing out of retirement planning. In fact I see what appears to be the opposite, from what I understand a Canadian version of the American 401K will be created to supplement existing RRSP's, CPP's, RPP's and OS's. The cost to the government will be in reduced revenues realized with personal income tax deductions for the new plan.

The gov't taking less money = getting out of retirement planning.

The writing is on the wall.

What's the average person's yearly retirement cheque 10K? You tell me someone who can afford to live on 10K and tell me they're living the lifestyle they want. If a person wants a secure retirement (around 50K/yr) they have to plan it themselves.

[Smallc]

The gov't taking less money = getting out of retirement planning.

The writing is on the wall.

I'm not sure what wall you're looking at, but it seem that the government is going to get even more involved in retirement planning. Too many people don't bother....thus, to continue our society as it currently exists, the government will have to step in.

[blueblood]

I'm not sure what wall you're looking at, but it seem that the government is going to get even more involved in retirement planning. Too many people don't bother....thus, to continue our society as it currently exists, the government will have to step in.

If you think our society can afford to throw tax dollars to a majority of a population that is retired in about 20 years your living in fantasy land.

Unless you think 10K a year is enough to retire on.

Society simply cannot afford to look after a population that size not contributing. Hence the TFSA's and RRSP's.

The only thing I can see the gov't "doing" is lightening the load on taxes on funds being put toward retirement.

IMO if the government is physically going to do something, why hasn't it jacked up the CPP rates, after all gov't knows best right?

[Topaz]

There may be people out there that don't care about retirement but I think most Canadians do but its hard to put money away if you aren't make that much. Most jobs are part time and most are making 8.25 hourly. Of course, if you have a good education and gone through college or university, your looking at heavy debt.

[Smallc]

IMO if the government is physically going to do something, why hasn't it jacked up the CPP rates, after all gov't knows best right?

Why would they do that? The CPP is fully funded for what it is designed to do. The fact that governments are going to create a new pension plan has been all over the news the last few days. It's a reality. If the feds don't do it, some of the provinces will, and if some of the provinces do it, then it will only be so long until others do.

[blueblood]

Why would they do that? The CPP is fully funded for what it is designed to do. The fact that governments are going to create a new pension plan has been all over the news the last few days. It's a reality. If the feds don't do it, some of the provinces will, and if some of the provinces do it, then it will only be so long until others do.

Well if you are saying that gov't is getting more in the business of retirement, then they'd have to jack up the CPP deductions in order to pay for higher retirement pay.

How are the feds going to pay for this pension plan? In order to pay for one, either they would have to up taxes, up CPP deductions, or cut taxes and let the retired people handle their own retirement. Which one is it?

If you think living off the CPP is a great way to live, enjoy the poorhouse. The CPP is a waste of money.

[Smallc]

First, the CPP isn't a waste of money, it's the only guarantee for some people of any kind of money. Second, the provinces or the feds are going to set up a new pension plan, whether or not it's mandatory or compulsory is still under debate.

Really, I've never heard an economist that said the CPP was a bad thing. It can be the difference between eating and not. It can be the difference between living and not. I'm not sure how you can support your assertion.

[blueblood]

First, the CPP isn't a waste of money, it's the only guarantee for some people of any kind of money. Second, the provinces or the feds are going to set up a new pension plan, whether or not it's mandatory or compulsory is still under debate.

Really, I've never heard an economist that said the CPP was a bad thing. It can be the difference between eating and not. It can be the difference between living and not. I'm not sure how you can support your assertion.

A person cannot afford to live off of CPP. It is essentially a tax. My bet is that new "pension plan" is going to be focused on having more and more people handle their own retirement.

A retirement plan can go a longer way if the CPP deduction was removed and that money was to be put into an RRSP/TFSA. To retire with an income of 50K lasting 30 yrs. A person needs about 770K in (all in today's dollars). Historically on average the stock market gets solid returns of about 10%. What that works out to is a span of over 30 working years, a person should be saving 2000 dollars per year (today's dollars) for a higher risk, and about 6400 for a low risk 5% return.

The CPP takes a max contribution of 2000 per year, and it JUST SITS THERE!!! It doesn't collect interest, doesn't improve itself with investments. At least the ontario teachers have some smarts and own MLSE which is a solid revenue machine.

What is the average Canadian better off doing with their 2000 per year, throwing it into an RRSP/TFSA which most likely will collect interest and grow over time, or throw it into some big government nonsense and not get near the retirement they are entitled to.

[Smallc]

throwing it into an RRSP/TFSA which most likely will collect interest and grow over time, or throw it into some big government nonsense and not get near the retirement they are entitled to.

That assumes that A) everyone would do that and B ) people can afford to save enough to make what they'd get with the CPP. You're being rather selfish in your own position.

Edited December 20, 2009 by Smallc

[ToadBrother]

That assumes that A) everyone would do that and B ) people can afford to save enough to make what they'd get with the CPP. You're being rather selfish in your own position.

It's pretty obvious he's coming at this from an extreme Libertarian position. Most Canadians think the CPP is a good think, so he's just out of luck. No government in this country is going to get out of the pension business. It's an absurd claim, based largely upon some vague hope at wish fulfilment. If the Conservatives were thinking it, and it got out, they'd be dead in the water.

But Libertarians tend to live in little fantasy lands that rarely if ever touch the rest of the world. There's a reason every industrialized country on the planet brought in public retirement plans, and that rational hasn't change.

[blueblood]

That assumes that A) everyone would do that and B ) people can afford to save enough to make what they'd get with the CPP. You're being rather selfish in your own position.

How is that selfish. Anyone who thinks they can retire on a government pension is living in fantasy land. I don't think everybody would be getting back all the money they contributed. Plus then there is the baby boom thing. Do you think the CPP can support all of that?

It's an expensive, second rate program. The money doesn't grow, and a person is lucky to get back what they contributed. A far better one would be to eliminate the CPP and remove the income tax on RRSP's and placing a lower cap on the max. contributions.

If people are stupid enough to be living beyond their means that's their problem not mine.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

The gov't taking less money = getting out of retirement planning.

The writing is on the wall.

What's the average person's yearly retirement cheque 10K? You tell me someone who can afford to live on 10K and tell me they're living the lifestyle they want. If a person wants a secure retirement (around 50K/yr) they have to plan it themselves.

I have a company plan that pays 60K a year.

[Smallc]

The money doesn't grow, and a person is lucky to get back what they contributed.

The CPP itself grows every year at about 5 - 7% plus contributions from what I remember.

Edited December 20, 2009 by Smallc