Cameron Posted February 9, 2012 Report Posted February 9, 2012 Here is an interesting article by Stephen Maher Linky Quote Economic Left/Right: 3.25 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.26 I want to earn money and keep the majority of it.
Topaz Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 Well, coffee shop talk this past weekend was everyone seem to agree that the Tories shouldn't touch OAS, even if it was for future generations. One person said he thought that the Tories would rise the age and then stop any increases to any of the benefits. I'm not sure they can do that, can they? If they can, I'm sure the next party to take over would change it. Depending how many people the Tories let in the country, that also would create the same problem and why haven't they gone with income instead of age. Could be that they need want to peeve off the people that support them financially? Quote
Argus Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 Well, coffee shop talk this past weekend was everyone seem to agree that the Tories shouldn't touch OAS, even if it was for future generations. No doubt the coffee shop chatter in Athens was the same ten years back. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 The Tories, as is their habit, are doing a piss-poor job of explaining what their policy is, much less why they want it put it in place. Was watching the CBC the other night, and the numbers worked out to only about a 30% rise in the cost of the OAS at peak. They all seemed to agree this was easily affordable. But hold on. That's like $11-12 billion extra in today's dollars. That's not chump change, you know. Moreover, while in itself it could be affordable by, say, reinstating the 2% GST the Tories cut it's not arriving in a vacuum. It's a part of the increasing costs for the aging society which will include far more for health care and senior care. So let's say $12 billion for this and $25 billion for health care costs, and another $10 billion for senior housing/nursing homes, and throw in a steep decline in the number of Canadians working to pay for it all. What do you have? Not something you can just shrug off. Or does anyone think we could easily handle another $45 billion or so in taxes today? If they want to start reigning in those costs then cutting here and there and wherever they can is going to be a part of it, and yes, that could mean some trimming to OAS, and maybe working at keeping Canadians working a little longer too... Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
WWWTT Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 No doubt the coffee shop chatter in Athens was the same ten years back. Once again you are trying to imply that we can become another "Greece" This is completely imposible and false. WWWTT Quote Maple Leaf Web is now worth $720.00! Down over $1,500 in less than one year! Total fail of the moderation on this site! That reminds me, never ask Greg to be a business partner! NEVER!
Smallc Posted February 14, 2012 Report Posted February 14, 2012 Well, coffee shop talk this past weekend was everyone seem to agree that the Tories shouldn't touch OAS, even if it was for future generations. Who cares? Quote
capricorn Posted February 14, 2012 Author Report Posted February 14, 2012 Who cares? Certainly not those seniors who are healthy enough to work past the age of 65. And, hmmm, I've seen plenty of evidence that as a whole we're living longer and healthier than ever. So it follows that by making the full OAS payment available only at age 67, more seniors will opt to work until then. The larger workforce we have, the more taxes are collected, etc. etc... Quote "We always want the best man to win an election. Unfortunately, he never runs." Will Rogers
msj Posted February 14, 2012 Report Posted February 14, 2012 Who cares? Those of use who were looking forward to retiring at 65 and receiving the OAS as a "bonus?" Those people who will end up retiring at some point who could really need the money at 65 rather than 67? Sure for you and me $6,500 is what? A half month's pay? For many people $6,500 per year makes a big difference. I see enough clients where it does make a difference that it spurs me on to work harder, make more money, and to save as much as I can because you can not trust any government. Especially if you are poor. Quote If a believer demands that I, as a non-believer, observe his taboos in the public domain, he is not asking for my respect but for my submission. And that is incompatible with a secular democracy. Flemming Rose (Dutch journalist) My biggest takeaway from economics is that the past wasn't as good as you remember, the present isn't as bad as you think, and the future will be better than you anticipate. Morgan Housel http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2016/01/14/things-im-pretty-sure-about.aspx
Smallc Posted February 14, 2012 Report Posted February 14, 2012 Those of use who were looking forward to retiring at 65 and receiving the OAS as a "bonus?" That wasn't my point at all, as I'm sure you know. My point was that people think a great many stupid, selfish things that aren't often in their own best interests. Oh, and I wish $6500 was a half month's pay. Quote
msj Posted February 14, 2012 Report Posted February 14, 2012 That wasn't my point at all, as I'm sure you know. My point was that people think a great many stupid, selfish things that aren't often in their own best interests. Oh, and I wish $6500 was a half month's pay. Oh dear, then, yes, indeed, people do "think a great many stupid, selfish things." I'm so selfish that I don't think that my wife and I should be able to avoid OAS clawback due to pension splitting. I would rather pay the clawback and taxes and let poor buggers like you collect at 65. No, seriously, I think we would all be better off. Quote If a believer demands that I, as a non-believer, observe his taboos in the public domain, he is not asking for my respect but for my submission. And that is incompatible with a secular democracy. Flemming Rose (Dutch journalist) My biggest takeaway from economics is that the past wasn't as good as you remember, the present isn't as bad as you think, and the future will be better than you anticipate. Morgan Housel http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2016/01/14/things-im-pretty-sure-about.aspx
Smallc Posted February 14, 2012 Report Posted February 14, 2012 (edited) I don't support either thing. Raise the age, get rid of the pension splitting. Edited February 14, 2012 by Smallc Quote
msj Posted February 14, 2012 Report Posted February 14, 2012 I don't support either thing. Raise the age, get rid of the pension splitting. You seem very confident that OAS is not sustainable unless we raise the age and end pension splitting. On what basis are you making these assumptions? Quote If a believer demands that I, as a non-believer, observe his taboos in the public domain, he is not asking for my respect but for my submission. And that is incompatible with a secular democracy. Flemming Rose (Dutch journalist) My biggest takeaway from economics is that the past wasn't as good as you remember, the present isn't as bad as you think, and the future will be better than you anticipate. Morgan Housel http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2016/01/14/things-im-pretty-sure-about.aspx
Smallc Posted February 14, 2012 Report Posted February 14, 2012 You seem very confident that OAS is not sustainable unless we raise the age and end pension splitting. On what basis are you making these assumptions? Im sure we can make it sustainable, but at the expense of what? The federal government should be working to ensure that things like equalization can be maintained, and that the books are balanced and taxes low to give the provinces room to tax and spend to maintain healthcare and essential serviices. Quote
msj Posted February 14, 2012 Report Posted February 14, 2012 Im sure we can make it sustainable, but at the expense of what? The federal government should be working to ensure that things like equalization can be maintained, and that the books are balanced and taxes low to give the provinces room to tax and spend to maintain healthcare and essential serviices. Oh, so no basis at all.... Quote If a believer demands that I, as a non-believer, observe his taboos in the public domain, he is not asking for my respect but for my submission. And that is incompatible with a secular democracy. Flemming Rose (Dutch journalist) My biggest takeaway from economics is that the past wasn't as good as you remember, the present isn't as bad as you think, and the future will be better than you anticipate. Morgan Housel http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2016/01/14/things-im-pretty-sure-about.aspx
Argus Posted February 14, 2012 Report Posted February 14, 2012 Once again you are trying to imply that we can become another "Greece" This is completely imposible and false. WWWTT Why? Ontario is already in worse shape than Greece. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
guyser Posted February 14, 2012 Report Posted February 14, 2012 Why? Ontario is already in worse shape than Greece. <cough cough>.....no it isnt, not even close. Quote
punked Posted February 14, 2012 Report Posted February 14, 2012 Why? Ontario is already in worse shape than Greece. Wow hyperbole much? Quote
Smallc Posted February 15, 2012 Report Posted February 15, 2012 Hmm, interesting: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/commentary/neil-reynolds/rosy-oas-forecast-rests-on-shaky-ground/article2338217/ Good question really. What is Mr. Page is wrong? Heaven knows he's been wrong before. Quote
waldo Posted February 15, 2012 Report Posted February 15, 2012 Hmm, interesting:http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/commentary/neil-reynolds/rosy-oas-forecast-rests-on-shaky-ground/article2338217/ Good question really. What is Mr. Page is wrong? Heaven knows he's been wrong before. so you find a journalist with suspect credentials... at best... and he's speculating and postulating and... how's about the actual OAS actuary... or the several prominent economists... or... Quote
Smallc Posted February 15, 2012 Report Posted February 15, 2012 As the article says, Mr. Page, has been wrong more than Finance Canada. Quote
msj Posted February 15, 2012 Report Posted February 15, 2012 Hmm, interesting: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/commentary/neil-reynolds/rosy-oas-forecast-rests-on-shaky-ground/article2338217/ Good question really. What is Mr. Page is wrong? Heaven knows he's been wrong before. Oh, still no basis. This is why we need some kind of commission set up to look at this. Lets look at the numbers. What does the government have to hide? Why is it wrong to call for a thorough look at the numbers? Given the changes that Harper has brought in over the years (cut GST, pension splitting, various tax credits, continued and escalated cuts to corporate taxes) it only seems right that this gets revisited. So why don't you want to see it studied? Quote If a believer demands that I, as a non-believer, observe his taboos in the public domain, he is not asking for my respect but for my submission. And that is incompatible with a secular democracy. Flemming Rose (Dutch journalist) My biggest takeaway from economics is that the past wasn't as good as you remember, the present isn't as bad as you think, and the future will be better than you anticipate. Morgan Housel http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2016/01/14/things-im-pretty-sure-about.aspx
Smallc Posted February 15, 2012 Report Posted February 15, 2012 Did I once say I didn't want to see it studied? You should probably stick to putting words in your own mouth. This, raising the age, would actually be harmful to my business interests, so it isn't as if I'm agreeing with the government's position for selfish reasons. Go ahead, study it. They'll probably find exactly what most thinking people are already aware of - more old people, living longer, will put a strain on this and other areas of the system, and something will have to give. Just ask Kevin Page. He used to think so. Quote
cybercoma Posted February 19, 2012 Report Posted February 19, 2012 No doubt the coffee shop chatter in Athens was the same ten years back. How is our economy even remotely comparable to the economy of Greece? Quote
Smallc Posted February 19, 2012 Report Posted February 19, 2012 How is our economy even remotely comparable to the economy of Greece? It isn't, but it is important for us to ensure that we control expenses. We have to plan for the worst going forward. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.