Should CPP start at 67?

[Politics1990]

3 hours ago, CdnFox said:

The 55 remark was beyond dumb.  Dumb seems to be your wheel house.

There is exactly the same thing wrong with it as 20. 

bullshit. By that time they should be a supervisor. Or more likely a teacher or instructor.  How many people are 'construction workers' at 65. 

And nobody is "working them",  they work to earn money. 

Sure there is - there are several:

1 - the gov't is borrowing the money to waste and we can't afford that anymore.  We're at 100 billion a year and we're going to wind up crashing the economy. So where are you going to find 100 billion a year AND enough to pay for this in 'savings'?

2 - starting earlier means paying a LOT more people, life expectancy rates and such would mean you're basically paying out double the number of people  on average than you would be if you started at 65, where mortality rates start to substantially incrase, We can't afford that. 

3 - Because of the extra time even if it WAS the same number of people the gov't budget for OAS alone, which is unfunded,  would go from 80 billion to about 150 billion .  Where you gonna come up with that extra money?  CPP is currently funded but wouldn't be if you started the pay outs earlier so you'd be looking for about an additional 100 bilion there as well.  AND AT THE SAME TIME, you're taking a huge number of taxpayers out of the eqauasion

 4 - you're literally slashing the labour pool, and not just in general but by the top most experienced people. People that cannot be replaced easily. Which means less productivity AND ALSO they're the top earners so you're throwing out hundreds of billions of dollars in tax revenue. 

 

Why not start them at 20 so they can enjoy the time they have left?  Why don't ALL people have the right to enjoy the time they have left? Not that it's possible for even working people to live at 20 atm with grocery prices anyway for a lot of people,  thanks to liberal and left wing stupidity which blew all our money that you'd like to double down on

And? too bad he didn't pass his work ethic on to you. 

 

What you're suggesting is stupid. And you obviously didn't put a single second of thought into it. As things are we can't afford to continue to pay out the way we have. We can't afford a lot of things any more and we're going to have to cut a lot AND reverse the stupid policies that got us here, and you want to throw in another policy that we can't afford and is stupider than most.

If you want to retire at 55 save your own money and do it yourself.  Retirement in this day and age from a gov't benefits point of view should be 67, it's not there to provide people a liesurly life, it's there to make sure elderly don't starve once they're past their working years. 

lol you a complete clown like usual  block list time

Edited October 1, 2025 by Politics1990

[CdnFox]

14 hours ago, Politics1990 said:

lol you a complete clown like usual  block list time

Awww couldn't refute a single thing so you're going to go stick your head in the sand?  LOLOL

This is what happens when you give them facts and figures boys

[eyeball]

19 hours ago, Legato said:

Then stop moving them. They don't work on a cricket pitch.

WTF are you babbling about?

[Legato]

24 minutes ago, eyeball said:

WTF are you babbling about?

What? This boards eminent goal post shifter is at a loss for words. Hilarious.

[eyeball]

1 minute ago, Legato said:

What? This boards eminent goal post shifter is at a loss for words. Hilarious.

I said global revenue agency times and you said goalpost.  Please by all means put whatever you think was moved back where you think it belongs.

 

[Legato]

17 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I said global revenue agency times and you said goalpost.  Please by all means put whatever you think was moved back where you think it belongs.

 

Why? You just keep on moving them.

Like I said cricket pitches are not conducive to footballs.

[eyeball]

Just now, Legato said:

Why? You just keep on moving them.

Where? I'd love to discuss the idea of a global revenue agency. Why you don't seems obvious enough, you think it's communism. But why would you run away from that?

4 minutes ago, Legato said:

Like I said cricket pitches are not conducive to footballs.

And your football is just a nonsensical inanity you tried to kick between some goalposts. There's no need for me to move something you can't even bear to look at never mind score a goal against. 

[Legato]

6 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Where? I'd love to discuss the idea of a global revenue agency. Why you don't seems obvious enough, you think it's communism. But why would you run away from that?

And your football is just a nonsensical inanity you tried to kick between some goalposts. There's no need for me to move something you can't even bear to look at never mind score a goal against. 

You said tax the rich, I said it never works, then you shifted the goalposts and sputtered something about a global revenue agency as though it's some viable entity.

Do try to keep up.

[eyeball]

45 minutes ago, Legato said:

You said tax the rich, I said it never works, then you shifted the goalposts.

Because wealth moves you said.

But I'd acknowledged that before you piped up by suggesting an exit tax.

Why didn't you say goalposts then?

I'm making it pretty obvious my intent is to not allow the rich to escape taxation - a global revenue agency would be more efficient.

One international goalpost makes more sense than 200 hundred or so don't you think?

 

[CdnFox]

26 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Because wealth moves you said.

But I'd acknowledged that before you piped up by suggesting an exit tax.

Why didn't you say goalposts then?

I'm making it pretty obvious my intent is to not allow the rich to escape taxation - a global revenue agency would be more efficient.

One international goalpost makes more sense than 200 hundred or so don't you think?

 

So your solution is to surrender our sovereignty to a gigantic socialist organization that controls every country

Yeah, I kind of think that's what people are worried about   

 

[eyeball]

36 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

So your solution is to surrender our sovereignty to a gigantic socialist organization that controls every country

No it's too lead the world towards....the Federation.

A global economy would make a lot more sense with a global government.

Never mind that keeping an eye on one government would be a lot easier than trying to keep tabs on 200.

Why do you think the rich prefer we're all divided up like this? The easier to keep their wealth on the move is why.

39 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Yeah, I kind of think that's what people are worried about 

Stupidly, frightened and compliantly - almost like it was planned to be that way.

You can bet the wealth protection industry works just as hard at thwarting human welfare as the oil industry works at thwarting climate action - for the exact same reason.

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

No it's too lead the world towards....the Federation.

Of course it is comrade. 

Quote

A global economy would make a lot more sense with a global government.

Yeah, i think that's what the WEF haters have been kind of afraid of .

Quote

Never mind that keeping an eye on one government would be a lot easier than trying to keep tabs on 200.

Hilter certainly thought so.

Quote

Why do you think the rich prefer we're all divided up like this? The easier to keep their wealth on the move is why.

The rich don't prefer us divided. At all. The rich prefer a happy healthy population with lots of disposable income. And above all else they prize stability.  They like to be able to feel comfortable spending a billion on a new factory or venture thinking they know what things will be like 5 years down the road when it's finished.  And people out there spending money makes them money.

 

Quote

Stupidly, frightened and compliantly - almost like it was planned to be that way.

Well the stupidly and frightened part maybe, and it was planned. By those who want things unstable. But that's definitely not the wealthy by and large.  I don't see a lot of "compliance' tho, if anything the opposite is true. 

 

Quote

You can bet the wealth protection industry works just as hard at thwarting human welfare as the oil industry works at thwarting climate action - for the exact same reason.

The 'wealth protection' industry  LOL 

You mean accountants?

Wealthy people already pay the vast vast majority of taxes. For sure wealthy people like to see lower taxes on the wealthy. 

But remember something - wealthy people cannot get wealthy in this day and age without creating wealth for others. "wealth" is not a finite thing, 'wealth' is a flow. It's activity. I create  a widget, and i sell it to you, and wealth is created. Then i go use that money to buy eggs from the farmer and more wealth changes hands, i now own eggs that i didn't, he owns money he didn't, you own a widget you didn't.  If none of us traded anything then there wouldn't be any wealth. 

The solution is never to make fewer wealthy people as you say. The solution is to enable and encourage more of the poor and middle class to be more wealthy.

 

[eyeball]

3 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Of course it is comrade....

Yeah, i think that's what the WEF haters have been kind of afraid of .

Hilter certainly thought so.

Commies...fascists...make up your mind...

The combination of fear and hate has fried your people's brains.

6 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

I don't see a lot of "compliance' tho, if anything the opposite is true. 

Nope, you've consumed so much fear and hate Kool aid that you're drunk.

7 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

The 'wealth protection' industry

Yup that's what it's called. It's what Carney did for a living and its why you shouldn't have voted for him.

9 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Wealthy people already pay the vast vast majority of taxes.

Not according to whistleblower Warrant Buffet. And in any case it's not just about tax avoidance but also about tilting the economic playing field towards the uber-rich.

You just watch, the rate at which the wealth gap widens will increase during Carney's watch.

14 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

The solution is never to make fewer wealthy people as you say. The solution is to enable and encourage more of the poor and middle class to be more wealthy.

Yeah well, you'll need a couple more planets to do that now. This one's just about all been used up and the rich are closing in on what's left faster and more determinedly than ever.  More than governments can keep track of never mind up with.

[herbie]

YA know they could end CPP/OAS, EI and welfare all at once with a Guaranteed Income.

[eyeball]

Not to mention they could save taxpayers money by doing so.

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Commies...fascists...make up your mind...

Why would i limit you?  Sounds more like you should make up YOUR mind but if you prefer both then we'll just say you're "trans-socialist"

Quote

Nope, you've consumed so much fear and hate Kool aid that you're drunk.

????  LOL you're going down hill quick big guy, you're making less sense with every line. 

Quote

Yup that's what it's called. It's what Carney did for a living and its why you shouldn't have voted for him.

No, he helped people avoid places with really high taxes.  That's what happens when you have really high taxes.

and as a conservative who believes in lower taxes that would be a reason I SHOULD vote for him. But i didn't for other reasons.  You're the one who's here 24/7 defending the liberals and their kind 

Quote

Not according to whistleblower Warrant Buffet. And in any case it's not just about tax avoidance but also about tilting the economic playing field towards the uber-rich.

According to the IRS in the states and Canada revenue they do. And those are probably vastly more reliable sources 

Quote

You just watch, the rate at which the wealth gap widens will increase during Carney's watch.

For sure. The liberals will continue to bring the economy down and over spend and have no good plan to make what needs to happen happen. It'll be a disaster.  Which is why YOU shouldn't have voted for him.

Quote

Yeah well, you'll need a couple more planets to do that now.

Nope. This one is fine.

Quote

This one's just about all been used up and the rich are closing in on what's left faster and more determinedly than ever.  More than governments can keep track of never mind up with.

Nope, If anything there's new ways to create wealth popping up every year. 

It gets easier and easier to start a successful business even as a supplementary side gig. 

And you've been saying that for decades   

[I am Groot]

14 hours ago, herbie said:

YA know they could end CPP/OAS, EI and welfare all at once with a Guaranteed Income.

And that would pretty much end the need for anyone to work at low-paying jobs. But I'm sure THAT wouldn't do any harm to our economy. 

14 hours ago, eyeball said:

Not to mention they could save taxpayers money by doing so.

All you lefties have these wonderful ideas about how to reorder society, but haven't got a bloody clue about human behaviour.

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, I am Groot said:

All you lefties have these wonderful ideas about how to reorder society, but haven't got a bloody clue about human behaviour.

Compared to how hard-boiled right-wingers would reorder First Nations by telling them to get over losing their lands less than a couple hundred years ago?  In a world where the very same hard-boiled right-wingers encourage Israel to fight for lands they lost a couple thousand years ago?

Good luck with that. What you people never get is that nothing happens in a vacuum.

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Compared to how hard-boiled right-wingers would reorder First Nations by telling them to get over losing their lands less than a couple hundred years ago?  In a world where the very same hard-boiled right-wingers encourage Israel to fight for lands they lost a couple thousand years ago?

Both lies. First off the first nation still own the land as Canadians the same as every Canadian does. They have every single right that every Canadian has and then some on top of that.

And nobody is saying that Israel should be fighting for its land that it had thousands of years ago. It's saying that they should be fighting for the lands they have today, right this minute. They go on to say that they are entitled to that land because they lived there thousands of years ago but it's the fact that they're on it today that gives them the right to fight when somebody attacks them.

The left can't even have an honest discussion about this stuff and that seriuosly limits the choices for dealing with it.  As gaza is currently finding out. 

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

First off the first nation still own the land as Canadians the same as every Canadian does.

They have every single right that every Canadian has and then some on top of that.

Sure but they also have territories within Canada that other Canadians don't have...the some on top of that's always at issue with deniers and for whom it'll always be too much no matter what.

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

...it's the fact that they're on it today that gives them the right to fight when somebody attacks them.

The same is true of Palestinians. And it needs to be said that Canada was instrumental in showing Israel how to move Palestinians from their homes and territories onto reserves.

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

The left can't even have an honest discussion about this stuff and that seriuosly limits the choices for dealing with it.  As gaza is currently finding out. 

No, this just typical right-wing projection. As Gaza has likely known all to well for far too long.

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

Sure but they also have territories within Canada that other Canadians don't have...the some on top of that's always at issue with deniers and for whom it'll always be too much no matter what.

Yeah you've kind of shot yourself in the foot. You just completely disproved your argument that they're fighting for stolen land. They have all the land that they ever did and special rights to some of the land that nobody else does. That wasn't a terribly intelligent thing to say

 

Quote

The same is true of Palestinians. And it needs to be said that Canada was instrumental in showing Israel how to move Palestinians from their homes and territories onto reserves.

Unfortunately they're the ones doing the attacking. They had a choice to live in peace and they chose not to and therefore israel is perfectly within its rights to slaughter them like the disgusting garbage humans they are. Hopefully in the future they will choose peace. If they do and someone attacks them then I will be the first in line to say they should defend themselves and we should help out. But so far they've been the aggressors for almost a century

 

Quote

No, this just typical right-wing projection. As Gaza has likely known all to well for far too long.

It has nothing to do with projection. It is a simple statement of fact. And if god is a new it they wouldn't have done what they did, it wasn't the right wing response they were counting on, they were hoping for a left-wing response and they didn't get it. They were banking that left Wingers would cave the moment they started taking casualties and give them freebies same as usual.

Instead they're getting slaughtered in their homes Because they chose violence and hatred and it was impossible to have a reasonable conversation with them.  That's what you get. 

[eyeball]

36 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Yeah you've kind of shot yourself in the foot. You just completely disproved your argument that they're fighting for stolen land. They have all the land that they ever did and special rights to some of the land that nobody else does. That wasn't a terribly intelligent thing to say

Said the terribly ignorant asshat...

Some do... like those in...wait for it...

A whopping 5%of BC.

46 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Unfortunately they're the ones doing the attacking.

No, it was European refugees who attacked Palestine. And we helped them.

53 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

It has nothing to do with projection.

It's pure projection - you're famous for being utterly unconscious of the mirror image of yourself that you project on people.

To paraphrase...

The  l̶e̶f̶t̶ right can't even have an honest discussion about this stuff and that seriously limits the choices for dealing with it.

 

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

Said the terribly ignorant asshat...

 

LOL  Oh dear, butthurt again because you screwed up i see  You can't blame me for your own mistakes man, that's just not fair. 

Quote

 

Some do... like those in...wait for it...

A whopping 5%of BC.

 

Not really  

Quote

No, it was European refugees who attacked Palestine. And we helped them.

Nope. A 100 percent on them.  they could have chosen to live in peace, they chose to attack instead, everything bad that happens to them is their fault.  They could lay down their arms tomorrow and very quickly have peace and prosperity.  IF israel laid down it's arms tomorrow we'd have another holocaust  100 percent them and they're reaping the rewards.

Quote

It's pure projection - you're famous for being utterly unconscious of the mirror image of yourself that you project on people.

No, that's just what you say to make yourself feel better. There's no projection kiddo. And just because the voices in your head agree with you doesn't make me 'famous'   

Quote

 

To paraphrase...

The  l̶e̶f̶t̶ right can't even have an honest discussion about this stuff and that seriously limits the choices for dealing with it.

 

If you want to talk about being famous for something, it's your tendency to make up crap that nobody said and argue with that  

I'm all about civil discussion as long as the other party stays civil. Insult me or make completely stupid remarks and that goes out the window. IT's you who keeps coming up with the dishonesty, the lies, the bullshit, the trying to pass off the dishonesty lies and bullshit as a joke,  You change your tune every 5 minutes, you CONSTANTLY have to try to rewrite something you said earlier, and as we see here when you make a mistake and are wrong about something somehow in your mind it's my fault    And when you're losing an argument  you try to change what the person said to something they never said and argue with that. 

None of that leads to a productive civil conversation.  Sorry.  Now go change your undies, you kind of smell funny  

 

Edited October 3, 2025 by CdnFox

[eyeball]

7 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Oh dear,

Yup, it is what it is.

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, eyeball said:

Yup, it is what it is.

True. In your case what it is would be yet another mental snap because you realize you're wrong. 

If you just take a little more time to think before you type it probably wouldn't come up so often.