In Canada, old-aged poverty on the rise

[Topaz]

OECD, says old-aged poverty is on the rise, and could become worse as Canadians aged. Women, seem to be the hardness hit and jobs for seniors are not plentiful and not many seniors can physically work. The problem for the Tories, is seniors DO vote and many who support this party may think twice before doing so. http://www.benefitscanada.com/news/in-canada-old-age-poverty-on-the-rise-oecd-46629

[PIK]

Always the tories fault. I know some aging seniors that lived larged for yrs and are now barly getting by. Yes there is problems for some ,alway will be no matter who is in power, but alot of it is the persons fault for not living within thier means. I know of a former NHL player who lived large during his carreer and now does not have a pot to piss in. Right now inONT it is the dlaton gang that has caused so much grief for our seniors and I see the energy minister came out today and told everyone to save the planet put on a sweater and turn down the heat. Lets put majority of the blame where it belongs.

[Topaz]

The blame is ALL levels of government. Right now, the local and provincial (in Ontario) are increasing property taxes, school taxes,hydro, gas, cable, gasoline prices, everything being increase and many people, especially seniors. The future of seniors are going to have to wait for CPP and OAS, unless the other two parties get into power and change it. The income splitting, isn't all that, a couple hundreds maybe and if the senior is around 40,000-50,000, not much help.

[Michael Hardner]

Former NHLers who blew their money should not be so much the concern of the government, neither should seniors who by this report are far below the poverty line and less than HALF of the poverty rate of children.

Priorities, people.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2013/11/25/child_poverty_rates_in_canada_ontario_remain_high.html

[eyeball]

Always the tories fault. I know some aging seniors that lived larged for yrs and are now barly getting by. Yes there is problems for some ,alway will be no matter who is in power,

There is no need for the problem of people barely getting by or worse, anyone in power could do something about it anytime they want. The Tories can only be faulted for choosing not to do anything too.

but alot of it is the persons fault for not living within thier means.

What does that even mean when half the freakin' planet is living large and beyond it's means?

[Bryan]

What does that even mean when half the freakin' planet is living large and beyond it's means?

If half the planet jumps off a bridge, does that mean you have to?

[eyeball]

I suspect the vast majority of old-timers you're casting your moral aspersions on were led to believe they were living within their means and that living large was almost a patriotic duty.

Good luck punishing half the planet for buying into that bridge now that it's crumbling around them.

[kimmy]

People used to take care of their own parents in old age, didn't they? Isn't this a recent result of people deciding that they should be able to put their elderly parents in a home so that they can "Freedom 55" without troubling themselves?

Maybe if the Boomers aren't happy with the way their elderly parents are being looked after, they should man up and do it themselves instead of griping about a lack of public funds.

-k

[TimG]

Maybe if the Boomers aren't happy with the way their elderly parents are being looked after, they should man up and do it themselves instead of griping about a lack of public funds.

In the past there were large families living in proximity and old folks would often die before they needed long term care. Today you have a lot of families with 1 or 2 kids and people living a lot longer. In the worst case a married couple could be on the hook for supporting 4 parents living in different cities (because of divorces) - that is way too much to ask.

My own plan is a graceful exit from life as soon as it becomes clear that I have no alternative but to spend the rest of my days in an institution, however, if this plan is hindered by a busy-body government making it difficult for me to follow the plan then I would expect the government to provide some support since they are the ones making things difficult - not my kids.

Edited February 10, 2014 by TimG

[kimmy]

Assisted suicide? Is that what you're referring to? Geez, Tim, I think any self-respecting Rugged Individualist should be able to do that without government support. Lots of people do. Pull yourself by your bootstraps!

-k

[TimG]

Assisted suicide? Is that what you're referring to? Geez, Tim, I think any self-respecting Rugged Individualist should be able to do that without government support. Lots of people do. Pull yourself by your bootstraps!

It really depends on the circumstances. It is rather difficult to achieve on ones own as a quadriplegic. But not withstanding mechanics it is frankly immoral to require a person wishing to exit from life to do it alone in order to protect loved ones from potential legal consequences.

That said, my main point is if the government interferes with people's free choices then it has an obligation to pay the costs that are incurred as a result of the interference. The solution that I want to see is not more funding but to stop interfering.

Edited February 10, 2014 by TimG

[kimmy]

I don't have any moral objection to the concept of assisted suicide.

But, we do provide support for old-people, and lots of it.

And I think that touting assisted suicide as a solution to elder care issues in Canada is going to be a very tough sell. By and large, people support assisted suicide in specific cases where quality of life is irreparably declining. They don't see it as a large-scale solution to the question of how to care for the large and growing number of old-people in our country. This isn't Logan's Run or Soylent Green.

-k

[cybercoma]

It's people.

[TimG]

And I think that touting assisted suicide as a solution to elder care issues in Canada is going to be a very tough sell.

I never said it was. I was simply responding to your suggestion that it is entirely the responsibility of the children to support their parents. The government restrictions on assisted suicide make the moral responsibility a lot less clear.

They don't see it as a large-scale solution to the question of how to care for the large and growing number of old-people in our country.

Modest income parents tend to have kids with modest incomes. So the people needing support are the least likely to have kids able to provide that support so it is never going to be a problem that can be solved by telling "kids to take care of their parents".

At the same time there will not be enough government money to do it either as the proportion of the non-working population increases. This means government funded places will likely be unpleasant places to live. I personally think it is inevitable that more and more people will look to assisted suicide because it is preferable to living decades in sub-standard government care. I think it would be nice to have a frank conversation rather than pretending that some magical fairy will solve these demographic problems.

Edited February 10, 2014 by TimG

[bleeding heart]

To those for whom assisted suicide is a major issue....well, at least as it stands now, they're pretty much going to have to forego lifelong conservative voting habits.

[PIK]

People used to take care of their own parents in old age, didn't they? Isn't this a recent result of people deciding that they should be able to put their elderly parents in a home so that they can "Freedom 55" without troubling themselves?

Maybe if the Boomers aren't happy with the way their elderly parents are being looked after, they should man up and do it themselves instead of griping about a lack of public funds.

-k

I am one that went the extra mile for my parents, kept my father out of the hosp till he died last yr and the same for my mother right now.I have given up a lot, like my life, but never ever had second thoughts.

[TimG]

Of course there are always robots:

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/sci-tech/rise-of-the-elder-care-robot-20120819-24g7w.html

The path toward robot acceptance may also require something very simple and, for robot manufacturers, frustrating: patience. The process of getting old people to be comfortable with robots, Saxena argues, will be a question of gradual acclimatisation. Elderly people will have to get used to having small, non-threatening observer robots watching them in their homes before they'll allow robots do tasks on their behalf — or even touch them.

[Topaz]

There's also a certain age group say 57-late 60's, who probably is more poorer than the older seniors. Many of them lost their jobs in 2008 and because of age or experience can't find a full time job, even if they went back for re-training, only to find there's no jobs available and would be lucky to find a part time job.These people are the ones who perhaps had a mortgage, line of credit, credit card debt that are in trouble. Many probably have lost their homes and the ones 60's would be forced on to CPP and lose 36% of the total.

[kimmy]

There's also a certain age group say 57-late 60's, who probably is more poorer than the older seniors. Many of them lost their jobs in 2008 and because of age or experience can't find a full time job, even if they went back for re-training, only to find there's no jobs available and would be lucky to find a part time job.These people are the ones who perhaps had a mortgage, line of credit, credit card debt that are in trouble. Many probably have lost their homes and the ones 60's would be forced on to CPP and lose 36% of the total.

I have a hard time feeling a lot of sympathy. Young people-- people with the least seniority and work experience-- were the first people laid off and the last hired back when the "global economic meltdown" occurred. Boomers who spent most of their careers working in an era where jobs were plentiful and private companies still had pension plans have little excuse for still having mortgages and credit card debt at that point in their life.

"Toughen up! Be responsible for your own finances! Stay out of debt!" That's the message we younger people hear every day. I don't see why boomers who got "affected" by the economic meltdown should do any less.

Anyways, I doubt that those are really the ones being discussed when we talk about old-age poverty in Canada. I suspect the large majority of old-age poverty in Canada is among the parents of boomers, who got put into homes or slum apartments so that they won't be a burden to their offspring as they "Freedom 55".

-k

[bush_cheney2004]

... I suspect the large majority of old-age poverty in Canada is among the parents of boomers, who got put into homes or slum apartments so that they won't be a burden to their offspring as they "Freedom 55".

The "burden" of old parents is far easier to accept than the continued blood sucking from lazy kids still living at home.

[kimmy]

Meh. It's "the new normal", Dick. When you offshore the jobs and saddle people with enormous student loans, you can't be too shocked when they can't afford to move out on their own until later.

-k

[bush_cheney2004]

Meh. It's "the new normal", Dick. When you offshore the jobs and saddle people with enormous student loans, you can't be too shocked when they can't afford to move out on their own until later.

Meh...they can suck it up and move out anyway. Young people from across the sea have no problem finding work in Canada or the U.S.

Edited February 16, 2014 by bush_cheney2004

[kimmy]

They probably don't have student loan debts to pay off, or parents willing to continue letting them live at home. Parents who want their adult kids to move out can just say so, you know. That was still an option, last I heard.

-k

[bush_cheney2004]

They probably don't have student loan debts to pay off,

Or maybe they are just smarter and more industrious than the lazy brats living the "new normal". Aging parents don't have "student loan debt".

[jacee]

The surprise in this is that Canada lags behind other OECD countries in supporting seniors.

Kinda blows the myth of Canada's strong social safety net.

However, while old-age poverty declined in 20 OECD countries between 2007 and 2010, poverty among Canadas seniors increased by about two percentage points over the same period, according to the OECD.

Another reason for the rise of old-age poverty in Canada is that the elderly see slower income growth compared to the working-age population, according to the OECD.The report also notes that public transfers make up a relatively small share of senior citizens income in Canada: less than 39%, compared with 59%, on average, in the OECD.

There are many people who are unexpectedly becoming dependent on senior assistance - over 55 and lost businesses since 2008, no savings, no pension plan, no business equity that was going to fund their retirement, and no prospects - just when our seniors safety net is losing ground.

Whiner boomer babies kimmy et al can sit and rotate.

Not all "boomers" are living large on their kids taxes. Not all can be accused of having fat pensions.

Many raised their kids on $75-$100k incomes that have now TOTALLY disappeared! They can't help their kids with student debt and buying houses as they had hoped.

Suck it up! Stop resenting your elders because they can't support you in the style they raised you!

You have your health and energy.

Not so easy for those starting again after 60!

.

Edited February 17, 2014 by jacee