Should Women/Men Pay Different Rates for the CPP?

[overthere]

women live longer.

more women are alive at age 60/65 than men, when either can draw

CPP has a maximum benefit. once you reach it, which many workers of both genders do, annual income or average income or lifetime earnings don't matter.

The best part of this is making Wally invest his time, instead of earning money for his pension.

[Bryan]

women live longer.

They also retire earlier.

[cybercoma]

Instead of just rattling off unsubstantiated claims about women, based on nothing but conjecture and opinion, surely there must be some numbers out there somewhere, right?

[cybercoma]

I mean, who draws more from CPP men or women is something that's easily quantifiable and backed up by data. Perhaps those with the hypothesis that women draw more CPP should demonstrate that with some relevant data. I don't know who draws more and I would be interested to see the facts, rather than people opinions on something that can be shown with the appropriate data.

[waldo]

I am going to leave it to the OP to break the news that because they pay less and draw more they now have to pay more.

women live longer.

more women are alive at age 60/65 than men, when either can draw

CPP has a maximum benefit. once you reach it, which many workers of both genders do, annual income or average income or lifetime earnings don't matter.

I've provided CPP sourced data that shows the differential between men and women in terms of the average earnings-related benefit as a percentage of that CPP maximum benefit you mention... what have you provided other than your, per norm, unsubstantiated opinion?

let's recap:

- you still haven't acknowledged or spoken to the significant earnings differential women are subject to during their working years... and what that means, relatively speaking, for senior women in terms of being able to plan for their retirements, particularly what greater reliance on CPP it might mean for senior women.

- you still haven't spoken to the reliance factor on CPP... you won't offer comment whether or not you agree that there is a reliance differential on CPP (women versus men)... and if there is a differential, why is there one.

- you still haven't spoken to the quality of life aspect for senior women in retirement, most particularly, those fully dependent on their CPP draw (with OAS), most pointedly, those drawing the referenced 57% of the maximum average earnings-related benefit.

in lieu of the aforementioned recap, it's one thing for you to use (as of 2013) a 2.3 years lifespan differential to attempt to rationalize a greater CPP contribution rate for women... it's an entirely new reach for you to suggest a collective totaling of senior women in retirement warrants a greater contribution rate. As of 2013, there are 94,000 more female CPP standard beneficiaries than male...

[WestCoastRunner]

They draw from it on an average of 2.3 years longer. Using your numbers.

They also bury their husbands, care for grandchildren, carry on the family, do you want your mother, grandmother to carry on the financial liability?

[WestCoastRunner]

They also bury their husbands, care for grandchildren, carry on the family, do you want your mother, grandmother to carry on the financial liability?

Let's get real here.

[Shady]

They also bury their husbands, care for grandchildren, carry on the family, do you want your mother, grandmother to carry on the financial liability?

Bury their husbands? That's what life insurance does. Care for grandchildren? That's what the parents of the children are for. Carry on the family? What does that even mean? Another one of your substanceless posts.

[waldo]

What does that even mean?

Shady! Imagine you failing to grasp the point! Women in retirement are increasingly being called upon to deal with outstanding financial liabilities directly left them... women in retirement or planning for their own retirements, are increasingly being called upon to help support and care for family members.

you're quite selective in posts you choose to respond to in this thread! Care to comment on the lifetime earnings differential that most women are subject to over their working lives and how that might affect the ability of women to plan for their retirements... and whether you believe women are more reliant on CPP than men are? Care to comment on the quality of life many senior women face in their retirements, particularly those most reliant on CPP (and OAS) as their sole sources of retirement income?

[Shady]

Shady! Imagine you failing to grasp the point! Women in retirement are increasingly being called upon to deal with outstanding financial liabilities directly left them... women in retirement or planning for their own retirements, are increasingly being called upon to help support and care for family members.

you're quite selective in posts you choose to respond to in this thread! Care to comment on the lifetime earnings differential that most women are subject to over their working lives and how that might affect the ability of women to plan for their retirements... and whether you believe women are more reliant on CPP than men are? Care to comment on the quality of life many senior women face in their retirements, particularly those most reliant on CPP (and OAS) as their sole sources of retirement income?

There's several factors that go into lifelong earnings. Regardless, if one is taking more, and paying less into a system, it needs to be subsidized (in this case by men) in order for said system not to collapse. If everyone takes more than they pay in, there is no system.

[Shady]

Let's get real here.

I wish you would.

[waldo]

There's several factors that go into lifelong earnings. Regardless, if one is taking more, and paying less into a system, it needs to be subsidized (in this case by men) in order for said system not to collapse. If everyone takes more than they pay in, there is no system.

through this thread you've provided nothing to substantiate your claim/statements; you've provided no numbers.

what, as you say, are your "several factors that go into lifelong earnings"... and what point would you like to make (men versus women) in that regard?

in regards your reference to women "paying less into CPP"... let's have your number for that and your accompanying interpretation. Equally, let's have your number and accompanying interpretation to associate with your statement, "takes more than they pay in".

you didn't respond to my request - go figure! All you did was provide your mealy-mouthed, "there are several factors". Here try this again:

- care to comment on the lifetime earnings differential that most women are subject to over their working lives and how that might affect the ability of women to plan for their retirements?

- and whether you believe women are more reliant on CPP than men are?

- care to comment on the quality of life many senior women face in their retirements, particularly those most reliant on CPP (and OAS) as their sole sources of retirement income?

waiting Shady... let's have you provide something... for a change! You've shown you struggle with historical data, but let's have you try extra hard here, hey!

[Shady]

I think at this point waldo, we can just agree to disagree.

[waldo]

I think at this point waldo, we can just agree to disagree.

this is becoming quite the regular go-to you're presenting here... when the going gets tough, the less-than-tough runaway, runaway!

[cybercoma]

I think at this point waldo, we can just agree to disagree.

We can't even do that until you post evidence of your claims, which you haven't done. So until then we can all agree that you've made an unsubstantiated argument.

[The_Squid]

I think at this point waldo, we can just agree to disagree.

"Women get more money from CPP"

"Show some evidence for this claim"

"Let's just agree to disagree"

LOL

[guyser]

This thread is a prime example of how conservatives will often make these kinds of claims without actually looking at any sort of data. I don't know why this is such a common characteristic of conservatives, but it certainly seems to be.

And to think they doubled down on this one.

Looking pretty damn foolish in the meantime. Especially shady....he wants others to post facts but precludes himself. How outlandishly funny !

[Shady]

We can't even do that until you post evidence of your claims, which you haven't done. So until then we can all agree that you've made an unsubstantiated argument.

Evidence that women live longer? What would happen to CPP if men started living the same length of time? I think you know the answer.

[The_Squid]

Evidence that women live longer? What would happen to CPP if men started living the same length of time? I think you know the answer.

Nice try....

The claim wasn't that women live longer... the claim was that women draw more from CPP than men.

[cybercoma]

Evidence that women live longer? What would happen to CPP if men started living the same length of time? I think you know the answer.

You stated something that can be verified empirically: women draw more CPP than men.

That's not something you "agree to disagree" about. You're not entitled to your own facts. You can disagree on interpretations, but not the facts the,selves. In this case you've provided no support for your claim.

I'll wait for this like I'm waiting for your historical data in that other thread.

[cybercoma]

Who am I kidding? You know you're wrong. That's why you don't have data.

http://www4.hrsdc.gc.ca/[email protected]?iid=27#M_2

[Bonam]

Given the same lifetime payment into CPP, and other circumstances being equal, two people of either gender will draw the same monthly CPP benefit. Whoever lives longer will therefore get the most from CPP over the course of their life.

Of course, those who earn less in their career will get less from CPP, but they also paid in less, duh. (This seems to be the entire point presented by cybercoma and waldo and is clearly irrelevant to the discussion, since the discussion should obviously be normalized for income).

Neither of the above statements require "data", just a quick look at how CPP is calculated and some very basic math.

That being said, personally, I think it's fine that men and women get the same monthly amount from CPP if they had the same average salary throughout their career, even though this means women will on average get more (than men of equal income history) out of CPP due to living longer. Why am I fine with this? Because one's life expectancy depends on a whole ton of different factors, gender only one of them and not the most important, and CPP is there to provide a baseline adequate standard of living for however long you might live. If one was to try to adjust CPP contributions or benefits based on life expectancy, one should take into account smoking, alcohol consumption, genetic factors, participation levels in dangerous activities, location of residence, etc, and the bloat in bureaucracy would more than eradicate any savings or optimization thereby achieved, not to mention engendering complaints of unfairness. Keeping government programs simpler is its own good here. Or, on a more "ethicall" level, I don't think it would be right to punish people for living longer and healthier lives by reducing CPP payouts or increasing contributions for those with higher life expectancy.

However on the larger topic of CPP as a whole, I think the retirement age as a whole should be indexed to be a certain % average life expectancy, because otherwise as people continue to live longer and longer, they will be spending a greater and greater portion of their lives retired, which makes no sense. But that is a debate for a separate thread.

Edited October 15, 2014 by Bonam

[waldo]

Given the same lifetime payment into CPP, and other circumstances being equal, two people of either gender will draw the same monthly CPP benefit. Whoever lives longer will therefore get the most from CPP over the course of their life.

Of course, those who earn less in their career will get less from CPP, but they also paid in less, duh. (This seems to be the entire point presented by cybercoma and waldo and is clearly irrelevant to the discussion, since the discussion should obviously be normalized for income).

Neither of the above statements require "data", just a quick look at how CPP is calculated and some very basic math.

"other circumstances being equal"??? Is this just your catch-all caveat or do you have specific circumstances in mind? Regardless, are they... equal? Please clarify exactly what you mean by "a discussion normalized for income" and how that factors into contribution, calculation, benefits, etc.

[cybercoma]

"other circumstances being equal"??? Is this just your catch-all caveat or do you have specific circumstances in mind? Regardless, are they... equal? Please clarify exactly what you mean by "a discussion normalized for income" and how that factors into contribution, calculation, benefits, etc.

In other words, women pay more into CPP if we don't take real life into consideration.

[Hal 9000]

Who am I kidding? You know you're wrong. That's why you don't have data.

http://www4.hrsdc.gc.ca/[email protected]?iid=27#M_2

This chart shows people at age 65, is there something for age groups higher than that? I wonder what the numbers look like for 80+people