Do we need to raise the OW/ODSP rates?

[Mr.Canada]

I know that Mike Harris cut the social assistance rates by 21% when he came to power and they have barely moved since. Below is the maximum rates a single ow(welfare)/odsp(disability) person can get not including special needs allowances...

http://yourlegalrights.on.ca/sites/all/files/1percentincrease-NovDec2011.pdf

OW-$599 ODSP-$1064

As you can see ODSP is much better but it is very hard to qualify for perhaps rightly so. Is $599 enough to live on for a single person? The rates go up 1% each year but landlords can raise their rents 3-4% each year. This amount seems like very little and seemingly creates a situation of have and have nots in the poor people. It would seem that even the poorest of our society are not immune to division amongst its ranks.

I cannot seem to cut and paste to this topic for some reason so I will just link to an article.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/1269252--cohn-how-dalton-mcguinty-can-undo-the-welfare-legacy-of-mike-harris

It upsets me that the very poorest are constantly under attack and under constant threat of being cut off benefits they really need. Most of this attack is by the group set up to protect these people. I don't want my children developing attitudes that they are better then these people so I am planning to take them to help at a meal line this year. So many Canadians are one paycheque away from being on the streets or on assistance. Instead of looking down noses we need to show some compassion and give these people some dignity. Some are on help through no fault of their own. I know, I've been there. It's not fun.

It's weird that I disagree with the left on so much but find common ground with them here on this topic.

Edited October 14, 2012 by Mr.Canada

[The Right One]

someone making min wage ontario [$10.25] 40 hours a week makes $1640 per month before taxes.

welfare must remain atleast 50% below this.

[Mr.Canada]

someone making min wage ontario [$10.25] 40 hours a week makes $1640 per month before taxes.

welfare must remain atleast 50% below this.

Why must it remain 50% below this? Right now it is $1000 below this. It has remained at this level since 1995, that's 17 years.

[TheNewTeddy]

There are a few things that 'everyone' just 'has' to have... and by that I mean who is going to hire someone without a telephone or an e-mail address?

$20 for internet access, and $40 for a cell phone a month is reasonable.

Even if you believe that people should suffer for daring to not have a job, people need to be entertained. I'm not talking about a movie a day, but $50 a month should be enough for someone.

Looking for a job costs money too. $40 should be enough for transit for you during the month (though good luck trying to have that work in Toronto)

I've also found through personal experience that $50 a week, or, $200 a month, is a good number for groceries.

This adds up to $350

This is about 1.5 times higher than the current basic allowance. This does not account for medicine, clothing, even soap.

http://www.gscrentals.com/Apartments/Toronto/

Rent in Toronto will fetch you a minimum of about $650, perhaps less if you are lucky.

http://www.renterspages.com/ON/Windsor-apartment.html

In Windsor (random) closer to $500

This would mean the Toronto rate would increase from $599 to $1000

ODSP rules should be tightened up and subject to frequent review, and should increase by a similar amount (to $1,750) As well ODSP should pay you different amounts based on how severe your disability is. Paraplegics for example, should get more than someone who has working arms but not working legs. Those on the 'low end' of the disability spectrum would end up getting OW rates.

I do not believe that forcing people to suffer encourages 'them' to get better.

It will encourage those among them who respond to that to get better, and encourage those among them who do not respond to that to give up on life.

[Mr.Canada]

I agree with what you're saying except for trying to determine who is more disabled then another person. I think it's a slippery slope that will end up in endless court dates, easier just to have one disabled rate.

Also $1000 a month for an able bodied person? This is too high. I agree that the rates need to go up but not by $400 dollars. This is what OCAP is calling for but I think it's excessive. At $1000 a month there would be little need to look for a job at all or training I feel. I'd like to see a max of $750-800 for regular OW with ODSP being raised by the same amount. Don't forget that we have to pay for this increase somehow without raising taxes. People are taxed enough.

[login]

Social Assistance rates should be done regionally based on cost of living. The amount is completely secondary.

It should just be a flat rate assigned based upon cost of available housing and what is expected as a diet meeting the standard nutrition expectations that would be equivolent for a child/adult of the same body makeup if the person were subject to child welfare standards or prison standards or other in custody requriements. It will stop a lot of waste and reward those who get lower cost housing etc... since they still have the same maximum assets it will get them to be involved, when people are active in life they have more oppourtunities to find links for new work. Also with a solid work fare system they gain no advantages over alternative work.

I think the cost of living based on the location (region/municipality/district/etc) should be the point of assesment with modification on food allowance based on calory expectations for the workfare portion above the sedentary and health rate.

They shouldn't get money though they should be able to buy things they need and those thigns should be monitored through a "members card" debit /credit card, with only a lesser amount in cash on an as needed basis but they should note what they are spending the money on, with large value purchases over $500 for OW and over $1000-2000 for ODSP being screened. Since ODSP has a non needs based capital limit of about $5000 and OW $500 I think both programs are totally run the wrong way, the monetary sideis really secondary. The programs are really stupid the way they are run though.

someone making min wage ontario [$10.25] 40 hours a week makes $1640 per month before taxes.

welfare must remain atleast 50% below this.

This is ludicrist. The rate of wage labour versus OW are two completely seperate issues. People have to survive. Living within the grounds of society on $500/month is absurd in some areas, with easily over $100 on food and it being rare to find adult housing for less than $300, people still need to keep hygine etc.. people earning minimum wage don't have it easy in all cases either. These rates should not be based on monetary rationality they should be based on what is needed, that is the only principle that is required in determining what needs are met, all them.

It is the government that is REQUIRED to provide or they loose right of governance because they are not living up to their obligations as government. Rule of law is lost for them lawfully when they shirk their human duty.

While having communications is expected for these programs all phone (and if applicable internet costs) are to come from the basic needs portion. Internet and phone are not required by the programs but expected.

These programs need to be demonetized though, social housing needs to be created, food co-op gardens, and other enterprises to fullfill these programs provided by those especially those long term in those programs. Demonetization of the programs is what needs to be done.

Edited October 15, 2012 by login

[TheNewTeddy]

I agree with what you're saying except for trying to determine who is more disabled then another person. I think it's a slippery slope that will end up in endless court dates, easier just to have one disabled rate.

Also $1000 a month for an able bodied person? This is too high. I agree that the rates need to go up but not by $400 dollars. This is what OCAP is calling for but I think it's excessive. At $1000 a month there would be little need to look for a job at all or training I feel. I'd like to see a max of $750-800 for regular OW with ODSP being raised by the same amount. Don't forget that we have to pay for this increase somehow without raising taxes. People are taxed enough.

We are under taxed if anything, but regardless, this money would come from tax transfers. Ontario raises about 45% of federal revenue but only receives about 35% of federal spending.

[NorthwestOnt]

YES...OW and ODSP need to be raised.YES ODSP and OW needs to be raised.

Though people on OW should be actively searching for work and not keep having more children while on OW. Bring back food stamps (resticted to be used by the recipient only, proof of ID) maybe that will sway the un-deserving from taking advantage of the system and/or spending the money on things like alcohol or drugs.

Being a recipiant of ODSP, this is a good topic.

Not all people live in Toronto. The cost of living is differant in all areas of Ontario. From housing, heating, transit, food and medical costs, as well as many other things. I for one don't know where anyone can get a phone for $40 or internet for $20.

I'm required to send information into ODSP whenever a situation arises (this is normally a few times a month) . Lets say 3x, thats a taxi trip to and from a fax machine and or post office = 6 taxi rides @ $9.00 one way a total of $54 a month. Medical min 2x = $36, grocery store another min of 2x =$36. ( Total $ 126.00 ) . Lets just hope I dont have a specialist appointment: that would mean round trip greyhound bus $116.00, motel $74, city taxi x4 trips aprox. $80, (total specialist trip $270.00 plus meals), Ontario travel grant for medical covers $152 of this and you have to wait anywhere from 6- 10 weeks for the refund. In the mean time you starve.

We can't afford to buy clothes, winter coats or boots, we dont have a social life because there is no entertainment money, I scrimp and save for these things, but just when we think all is working out an appliance breaks or we need a medical device etc. I'm sure you get my point. We feel like crap when we cant give our children or grandchildren gifts for birthdays or christmas. (sometimes its easier just to avoid special occasions. Most of us just exist.

I dont believe we should have to be torchered by the government just to beable to get basic items needed to live or to make our lives bareable. Such as fighting to have orthotics covered, to get a much needed ankle brace. To get funds so I can have kitchen chairs or a chair to sit in the living room with. I dont expect much , I dont want top quality, just something that is usable. Because of my knees/feet I was planning to move to a differant location, being my home has stairs. January 1st the start up benifit was removed. Now I have no choice but stay where I am. Believe me on the days I cant get up the stairs the floor isnt the nicest place to sleep.

Changes to the system have to be changed. Stop makeing the disabled suffer more than we already do.

[Boges]

Are people on Welfare expected to pay rent? I wouldn't know where to find a place anywhere in Ontario for less than $600/month.

I know of people that have tenants in their basement and have had rent cheques from the government.

A single person can easily live in $600/month if rent is taken care of.

[NorthwestOnt]

You obviously have no clue Boges . Common sense should tell you that ALL people are expected to pay rent.

A single OW person recieves $599 a month, which has to cover rent, living expenses and all other expenditures. If the government pays the rent directly to the landlord, then the OW recipiant recieves the remaining... The Gov. pays the rent of $500.oo directly to the landloard, then the OW recipiant recieves the remaining $99 for the month. This is for all living expenses. heat, phone , food, clothing, and so on. Never does a single person on OW or ODSP have $ 600 to live off of after rent is paid.

Are people on Welfare expected to pay rent? I wouldn't know where to find a place anywhere in Ontario for less than $600/month.

I know of people that have tenants in their basement and have had rent cheques from the government.

A single person can easily live in $600/month if rent is taken care of.

[Political Smash]

Yeah plea for a raise for the poor and they will will give you an extra 5 bucks per month. Then when word gets out, rent increases and groceries increase thus screwing the poor even more! a sad cycle.

Mr. Canada, people on welfare still are not getting what they did approx. 15 years ago

Yeah really member NorthWestOnt, also try finding a place that isn't manifested with crack heads or cock roaches or bed bugs for having to live on these current minimal subsidies.

David Jeffrey Spetch

Ps. be good, be strong!

Edited January 13, 2013 by Political Smash

[NorthwestOnt]

Hmm hope this doesnt repost it started sending while I was typing.

Your so right Political Smash. Thankfully I dont live in a city and dont have to contend with cockroaches or bedbugs though some people in my area I may address as such. Crackheads well their all over like it or not. It's pretty sad when we have people like Mr. Canada, thinking people on disability could be concidered able bodied. It's not an easy task to be accepted as a person with a disability. And there is no way any single person on OW gets even close to $1000.00 a month. As well after doing some investigation, I found out that a person on OW has to put in so many hours of volunteer work per month in order to get a full check.

[Political Smash]

I'm not trying to defend him NorthWestOnt but I think he was likely referring to OW as able bodied. Secondly I think the whole Ontario works volunteer thing is to get lazy people off their butts just to get a job because if they have to work anyway, they might as well get paid a minimum wage (not funny really)

/ David

Edited January 13, 2013 by Political Smash

[NorthwestOnt]

I'm not trying to defend him NorthWestOnt but I think he was likely referring to OW as able bodied. Secondly I think the whole Ontario works volunteer thing is to get lazy people off their butts just to get a job because if they have to work anyway, they might as well get paid a minimum wage (not funny really)

/ David

Lets hope he was referring to OW as able bodied. Your most likely right on the volunteer thing to get people off their butts. I for one would rather work and be paid for it than be on OW and be made to volunteer than many hours a month. Volunteering almost 80 hrs a month a person would make more income that what OW pays.

[Mr.Brewster]

there was a question raised on http://www.mapleleafweb.com

Do we need to raise the OW/ODSP rates?

here was my answer to the question:

Yes.

The current rates are very demeaning and morally wrong for people living in what is supposed to be one of the highest quality of life countries in the world. Lets break this down.



1. Minimum wage is 10.25 and hr. times forty hrs weekly times 4 = 1,640
2. A single individual is supposed to be getting 1,064.
3. This work out to 6.60 and hr. this is just wrong. minimum wage has not been at 6.60 an hr since 1994.
4. Not everyone on ODSP gets the maximum amount of funds each month. it is based like on OW to your rent. So for example and individual who pays 140.00 a month, with the basic needs the amount the receive is 722.00 monthly. this is a far cry from the 1,064.



Here is a chart from http://yourlegalrights.on.ca/sites/all/files/1percentincrease-NovDec2011.pdf

The point I am making is that if one was not they they would be able to work and at least be getting an hrly wage. why should we who are disabled be penalized by the rest of the "abled" because we are not able to do the same job.

It's a joke really, we see all over the t.v. lets get rid of discrimination. let treat disabled people fairly. lets give them a chance, they are people to, etc.. etc.. It's a sham because we are not being treated fairly, we are not being treated like humans at all to be honest, and we are being discriminated against, because at least an able bodied person can work and make the minimum wage + depending on the skill sets. make a living and raise a family etc, etc.. disabled people simply do not have the same luxuries that the rest of the populace do, it is that plain and simple, however we a constantly being mistreated even abused because we are disabled. Also we are not able to save money for our future unless you have a severe disability such as being in a wheel chair, meaning that the maximum amount that a disabled person can have in a bank occount is 6.000 dollars any more and the Ontario Government takes the money, this is plain theft. also saving for retirement is not possible as to qualify for the disability saving plan you need to basicly be in a wheel chair.

The above rates are truly appalling, and I call it abuse because that is what it is, it is abusive to the disabled person because he/she can not eat properly, they can not some of the same health care products they may need. even clothing is sometimes difficult to get as we are forced to got to clothing banks or shelters to get our needs met. this is all abusive because it is emotionally upsetting and causes needless stress. it is abusive physically because as I said sometimes we can not eat more than one meal a day and with the cost of living at the check outline we are forced to go to food banks which in most cases the food given is impractical that you can not eat it, because the food they give you need to be a chef to know how to cook it. abusive because this is what is going on in the social sense as benefits are getting cut left right and center.



So yes the rates need to change to reflect the cost of living of an abled body individual who has the grace to be able to work, the rest of us should not be trampled on by the policy makers who believe that the amount that we currently receive is sufficient when in reality it is not.

Yes because the needs are to great that the current basic needs amount giving does not meet the basic needs of so many.
Yes because if one is able to work then to do a complete job search requires additional funding for the individual because looking for work is a full time job. the idea that if we give these people more money they will loose the desire to work is just an excuse to keep us in poverty while the rest make a living above the poverty line. It takes money to make money and the amount giving to get a full time job simply is not feasible for such individuals as they hardly have enough to just survive, so looking for a job is simply out of the question for some.
Yes because considering where and when we live the amount given to disabled people is truly abusive, OW honestly is even worse and those individuals are "abled bodied".
Yes because there needs to be dignity giving back, at least by raising the rates to reflect current work wage rates than at least this can restore some of that dignity.

So in closing Yes simply because disabled people are people to an should be treated as such living here is a country such as Canada. We are known for our generosity and help when those in third world countries are faced with emergencies, yet the disabled are treated with more or less contempt and pretend they simply do not exist and then expect those who suffer with "able bodied issues" to work and be a productive member of our proud Canadian society. will this pipe dream that politicians are living in is really sad, because those who are able bodied living in South Korea have it better off than the disabled living in a first world country such as Canada.

as I said earlier the current rates are very demeaning and morally wrong and truly appalling and YES this needs to change. simply put, that is if we are really The True North strong and free!

Edited January 3, 2014 by Mr.Brewster

[AngusThermopyle]

Wow, old thread revisited.

This is a question that really has no easy answer. Yes, I believe those who are disabled should receive more than they currently do. When it comes to an across the board raise of all assistance my answer is no. Why do I say this? Quite simple really. There are some, quite a few in fact who simply refuse to work. An example would be one of my wife's sons. He is 27 and has worked less than two months in his entire life. There is nothing wrong with him, he's fully capable of working but refuses to do so. Instead he whines that he should be given more and quite frankly doesn't give a damn how much working people have to pay in taxes in order for him to receive more. We got him a job where we work. He lasted 3 weeks and 1 day then quit without any notice. Before his ex kicked him out (he was living with her in her mothers house) he would take the baby bonus check and spend it on himself. He claimed he deserved this as he was the one who made the baby, therefore the check belonged to him. He takes his monthly benefit check and buys as much weed as he can with it. He then sells the weed for profit and repeats the whole cycle. He lives in the homes of people he knows and when they get tired of him moves on to the next sucker. He always has the latest phone with a data plan even though he doesn't work. His Facebook page lists over three hundred friends and the majority of these people do not work either, leading similar life styles to his. So do you believe he and his friends should get more? I sure as hell don't.

What we should do is vet recipients of social assistance far more carefully than we do. Many no longer see it as a last resort type of thing and more of a lifestyle choice. This in turn taints the publics view of these programs and tends to vilify those who do genuinely need the assistance. There is no reasonable explanation as to why a healthy able bodied person can not find a job after several months never mind many years.

As I said, no easy answer to this one. Personally I say assess all the leaches and if they do not genuinely require assistance then cut them off. Some people will always choose the path of least resistance unless one actually denies it to them.

As for anyone who says we are not taxed enough, go get...well I'm sure you get the picture.

[Michael Hardner]

I'm not sure why such things aren't automatically tied to the cost of living. Mr. McGuinty certainly made a big deal over the heartless Harris government then didn't do a thing to address those cuts when he got into office, and waited years to raise the disbursement.

As for OW, I felt that I learned the biggest lesson about politics when I heard about the benefits of the changes he made to the program. Allowing people/requiring people to work is a means of socializing people into contributing as best they can.

The worst thing you can do for people on assistance is cut them off, the second worst thing is to just cut them a cheque IMO.

I think additional counseling and monitoring would cost more, however I would like to see a government really try to do something to give people on OW more options to engage and be part of society.

[jacee]

Wow, old thread revisited.

This is a question that really has no easy answer. Yes, I believe those who are disabled should receive more than they currently do. When it comes to an across the board raise of all assistance my answer is no.

I agree that ODSP (disability) and OW (welfare) need to be looked at entirely separately as they have very different purposes and clientele.

ODSP: Poverty itself is debilitating, and added to a permanent disability ...whether of mind or body ... difficulty getting around, getting groceries, limited opportunities/ability to socialize, and many other complications make life very difficult, draining and depressing especially for those living alone.

I know that appropriate living accommodations for people with physical disabilities are hard to find, and community supports for those with mental health issues are lacking as well.

Improved benefits? Perhaps. But I think more supportive housing arrangements would really help address the social isolation and personal management issues of nutritious eating, hygiene, finances, etc. IE, facilities for independent living with available supports, similar in concept to 'retirement homes' or university residences.

There are some, quite a few in fact who simply refuse to work. An example would be one of my wife's sons. He is 27 and has worked less than two months in his entire life.

...

So do you believe he and his friends should get more? I sure as hell don't.

What we should do is vet recipients of social assistance far more carefully than we do. Many no longer see it as a last resort type of thing and more of a lifestyle choice.

...

This in turn taints the publics view of these programs and tends to vilify those who do genuinely need the assistance.

...

As I said, no easy answer to this one.

OW: No there sure aren't any easy answers, and the example you provided is too common, lost young people flirting with criminality, couch surfing and subsisting on welfare, who just don't seem able to hold a job even if they can get one.

What we have now, I think, is a really bad compromise of welfare rates to low to even barely subsist on, I suppose to punish and discourage those too 'lazy' to work.

Unfortunately, it just is not enough to feed, house and clothe those genuinely in need.

I don't think more intensive screening for welfare is an answer at all when someone has an immediate need for food and shelter funds. I think what's needed are more intensive and more successful job training and job search and job experience programs. What may appear as 'laziness' to some, I believe is often a very deep lack of confidence in one's ability to succeed even at the smallest tasks, and the best cure for that is safe opportunities to experience success with someone supportive to help you through the inevitable missteps.

That said, I also think OW rates should be increased to meet basic costs of living because currently they simply don't.

.

Edited January 3, 2014 by jacee

[ReeferMadness]

guaranteed annual income.

[Human_Observer]

There are a few things that 'everyone' just 'has' to have... and by that I mean who is going to hire someone without a telephone or an e-mail address?

$20 for internet access, and $40 for a cell phone a month is reasonable.

I am employed full time 40+ plus hour a week. I am also a project manager in the engineering feild and have been for 15+ years. I also manage projects from $500,000 to $35 mil. Guess what! I do not own a cell phone, nor do I plan on owning one. My boss pays for the phones in the office and that is all I need to do my job successfully.

To most people a cell phone is a source of entertainment, nothing more!

[Human_Observer]

I believe the OW/ODSP rates are more than ample. You are getting payed for doing nothing.

I have to give up 40+ hours a week to support my family and then I am taxed a small amount to pay for your lazy ass. Thats slavery!

Yes there maybe a legitamit reason why some people are on walfare, but those people are not on for long.

I believe everyone can work! Those on disablity can do something worth while and employers should be encouraged to hire these people.

I am forced daily to impliment special equipment and designs to acoomindate the disabled and therefore the disabled should be able to work.

People should be given a hand up! Not a Hand Out!

[Michael Hardner]

Those on disablity can do something worth while and employers should be encouraged to hire these people.

You're making a blanket statement here. Of course, there are disabilities that make you unable to work and this is why the program exists. It's not an imaginary situation we're talking about. If you became disabled you could benefit from it too.

[Topaz]

Here's my view on this topic, if the three levels of government can boost THEIR own wages, then there's gotta be money for the Canadians at the bottom. I think these people who direct our lives NEED a reality check and I would like to see more of THEM go live with these Canadians that are struggling and do it in the wintertime. Many people lost their jobs in 2008, and many of them are on welfare, some on part time jobs, maybe even working at 2 of them, and most of them are now off EI. It's really sad,so I don't think people should have to struggle and the 3 levels of government should do more.

[AngusThermopyle]

So what do you think should be done about the cheats then Topaz? Sure there are those who have fallen on hard times through no fault of their own and these people should be given help. Honestly I don't think any reasonable person would deny that. On the other hand the cheats do exist as well, quite a few of them in fact. That's why I say a better job should be done of vetting them, these are people who take and contribute nothing. In doing so they deplete the available resources that could be better used to help those who genuinely need the help.

For instance my wife's son. He is capable of working yet chooses not to. What he does do however is constantly complain that he's not given enough to live in a style he chooses. Recently he was complaining about wanting to get a place of his own, admirable I suppose. He wanted a place located in an area called the beaches. Now I don't know Toronto very well but I get the impression that this place is considered to be one of the nicer places to live in the city.So do you think he should be given more money in order to live in a nice place while he continues to do nothing? Keep in mind that he isn't just an isolated case. His mom has me check his Facebook page from time to time so she'll have an idea of how he's doing. As I said he has many friends and a common theme amongst them appears to be trying to figure out how to get more for doing nothing. In fact recently they were discussing which Doctor to see in order to get a disability allowance. He thought that if claimed to have Diarrhea due to IBS he could receive a disability allowance. His friends shared their suggestions as to which doctor he should see in order to make this happen. Another topic they discussed was who to see in order to obtain a medical marijuana permit. Not that he needs it, its just something he wants, I guess it would make it easier for him to obtain weed to sell.

So do you think these people should be given more? You'll probably think I'm being unduly harsh but I believe they should be cut off and forced to find a job. Any job, even minimum wage, beats the hell out of receiving benefits for a living. As I mentioned before we did get him a job, not the greatest one out there but still decent. In fact if he'd stuck with it he would have been earning around $20.00 an hour by now. Not a fortune but in my opinion still a decent liveable wage. He didn't like going to work everyday though so he quit. Once again, do you believe people who make choices such as this should be more generously rewarded for doing so?

[jacee]

I am employed full time 40+ plus hour a week. I am also a project manager in the engineering feild and have been for 15+ years. I also manage projects from $500,000 to $35 mil. Guess what! I do not own a cell phone, nor do I plan on owning one. My boss pays for the phones in the office and that is all I need to do my job successfully.

To most people a cell phone is a source of entertainment, nothing more!

I'm sure she just meant that welfare should make allowance for a reasonably priced phone. People can't get off welfare without a job, and can't get a job without a phone.

Whether it's a cell or landline is irrelevant, just a personal choice.

Since they are on welfare and without jobs, they don't have the luxury of using their employer's phone like you do.

Edited January 4, 2014 by jacee