Seniors and Entitlement

[Wilber]

Why shouldn't it all come from general revenues? I don't have a problem with that at all. It makes no sense to make raising and educating a child even more expensive than it already is for parents.

For the same reason all of our daily life necessities don't come from general revenues. Why don't we expect government to pay for our food, accomodation, transport, and everything else?

What does that have to do with education? Don't you think education is at least as important as medical care. Without education you wouldn't have it. Other than the farmer and the grocery store, your pigging out at the dinner table doesn't benefit society. Your getting an education and doing something positive with it does.

[Renegade]

What does that have to do with education? Don't you think education is at least as important as medical care. Without education you wouldn't have it. Other than the farmer and the grocery store, your pigging out at the dinner table doesn't benefit society. Your getting an education and doing something positive with it does.

Both education and medicare would benefit if there was at least some element of user pay. By your logic doesn't food benefit society? Afterall, eating nutritous food keeps the population healthy, and isn't that good for society? So perhaps, I should expect that society should pay for all nutritous food.

[Wilber]

What does that have to do with education? Don't you think education is at least as important as medical care. Without education you wouldn't have it. Other than the farmer and the grocery store, your pigging out at the dinner table doesn't benefit society. Your getting an education and doing something positive with it does.

Both education and medicare would benefit if there was at least some element of user pay. By your logic doesn't food benefit society? Afterall, eating nutritous food keeps the population healthy, and isn't that good for society? So perhaps, I should expect that society should pay for all nutritous food.

How could increasing the cost of education to those who already have the expense of raising children help education and healthcare? Where would you earn the money to pay for that food if no one took responsibility for your education and you can't read, write and don't have basic math skills? How could an uneducated society afford to buy them for you?

The population of BC is increasing but school enrollments are declining and schools are closing. We are not maintaining the supply of educated young people our society will require to function in the future, we have to import them from elsewhere. People are deciding to have fewer children or none at all, partly because the cost of living is making it increasingly difficult to do so. Increasing the cost of raising and educating a child is extremely short sighted and ignores the reason societies educate their citizens at all. It is because the standing of a country in the world and its standard of living is directly connected to the literacy of its population.

[Renegade]

How could increasing the cost of education to those who already have the expense of raising children help education and healthcare? Where would you earn the money to pay for that food if no one took responsibility for your education and you can't read, write and don't have basic math skills? How could an uneducated society afford to buy them for you?

The population of BC is increasing but school enrollments are declining and schools are closing. We are not maintaining the supply of educated young people our society will require to function in the future, we have to import them from elsewhere. People are deciding to have fewer children or none at all, partly because the cost of living is making it increasingly difficult to do so. Increasing the cost of raising and educating a child is extremely short sighted and ignores the reason societies educate their citizens at all. It is because the standing of a country in the world and its standard of living is directly connected to the literacy of its population.

The world is already overpopulated and consumes way more resources than is sustainable. We do not need additional encouragement for parents to have kids. If making parents accountable for the cost of their kids causes them to rethink their decision or have fewer kids, that is a benefit for society. Except for insanely financed social programs which depend upon an ever-increasing base of working populations, society doesn't need ever increasing growth.

[Wilber]

The world is already overpopulated and consumes way more resources than is sustainable. We do not need additional encouragement for parents to have kids. If making parents accountable for the cost of their kids causes them to rethink their decision or have fewer kids, that is a benefit for society. Except for insanely financed social programs which depend upon an ever-increasing base of working populations, society doesn't need ever increasing growth.

Who is going to maintain the society you will need to survive in your old age. We may not need to grow but if we don't replace what we have we will gradually become a nation of 80 year olds. Japan is already finding this out. Declining school enrollments and school closures while population increases is losing ground.

How many fewer kids would be a benefit to society? Would none be a benefit?

[Renegade]

Who is going to maintain the society you will need to survive in your old age. We may not need to grow but if we don't replace what we have we will gradually become a nation of 80 year olds. Japan is already finding this out. Declining school enrollments and school closures while population increases is losing ground.

How many fewer kids would be a benefit to society? Would none be a benefit?

I don't see any problem with a gradual decline in population. What we need to augment the workforce we can garner through immigration.

How many people do you think it takes to service an aging population? Currently a very small percentage of the population is involved in providing services for the retired population.

[Wilber]

How many people do you think it takes to service an aging population? Currently a very small percentage of the population is involved in providing services for the retired population.

As the population ages, it will take more and more. It's not the size of the population, it's the demographic.

[Renegade]

As the population ages, it will take more and more. It's not the size of the population, it's the demographic.

I'm not worried. If there are less kids, that also means that there are less need for teachers and child-care workers. Those workers can be redeployed to look after the aged. Even if the demand for people to care for the aged grows, it is still very small relative to the overall working population.

[Wilber]

As the population ages, it will take more and more. It's not the size of the population, it's the demographic.

I'm not worried. If there are less kids, that also means that there are less need for teachers and child-care workers. Those workers can be redeployed to look after the aged. Even if the demand for people to care for the aged grows, it is still very small relative to the overall working population.

That makes no sense. If your working people are ageing and there are fewer young people, where are the working people going to come from?

[Live From China]

That makes no sense. If your working people are ageing and there are fewer young people, where are the working people going to come from?

Isn't that the problem we are now starting to face? The size of the skilled labor force is decreasing. This is a worry in many sectors.

[Renegade]

That makes no sense. If your working people are ageing and there are fewer young people, where are the working people going to come from?

Is your question about working population in general or specific to the part of the working population which cares for the aged?

I would estimate no more than 5% of the working population is involved in the elder care industry. The population is not exected to decline for at least 30 years. Even if the population declines slightly, and the senior population increases substantially, it is still requires only a small part of the working population to care for them. What's not to make sense?

[Renegade]

Isn't that the problem we are now starting to face? The size of the skilled labor force is decreasing. This is a worry in many sectors.

It is a self-correcting situation. As you get shortages, wages go up, incenting more people to enter that profession. The shortage also creates incentives for people to work longer instead of retiring, and as well for automation to replace manual labour.

[Live From China]

As you get shortages, wages go up, incenting more people to enter that profession.

Good in theory, but poor in practice. There is a large shortage of tradesmen in BC, and even though wages are high, young people are not going into these professions. It is becoming a real problem in Canada. It is definitely not a self-correcting situation!

[Renegade]

young people are not going into these professions.

And why do you think that is?

[margrace]

young people are not going into these professions.

And why do you think that is?

Suppose you tell us.

[Renegade]

Suppose you tell us.

Why would you care when you don't believe anything I say.

[geoffrey]

young people are not going into these professions.

And why do you think that is?

Suppose you tell us.

Well, 50% of Newfoundland's 16-65 don't work, so suppose they start into these professions?

[Live From China]

I think one of the reasons - and this is only speculation - is that the trades are often considered low class work. If you work with your head, you are somehow better than people who work with their hands. I don't understand it, as you can make a hell of a lot of money, and the trades are a very good career.

Well, 50% of Newfoundland's 16-65 don't work, so suppose they start into these professions?

Easier said than done. First, you want carpenters, plumbers, electricians, etc. trained "to standard." This means apprenticeships, and these, in this province at least, are damned hard to come by.

[Wilber]

Well, 50% of Newfoundland's 16-65 don't work, so suppose they start into these professions?

Well, that's probably not more than 150,000 people. Not nearly enough. Once you get them trained in those professions, then what? Besides, are we now expecting Newfoundland to provide the primary education for the rest of the country's work force? Newfoundland's population is declining as it is.

[Renegade]

This means apprenticeships, and these, in this province at least, are damned hard to come by.

I would suspect that this is one of the big reasons why the void is not filled. By limiting apprenticeships, the government creates artificial barriers to filling the job requirements. Further our immigration system does a poor job in matching between skill needed and those supplied by immigrants. In fact the immigration system seems to give preference to "white collar" skills, even when trade skills are in shortage.

In short, where skills and resource shortages exist, it is government interferences and government-erected obstacles more than any other reason which prevents those shortages from being resolved.

[Renegade]

Well, 50% of Newfoundland's 16-65 don't work, so suppose they start into these professions?

Well, that's probably not more than 150,000 people. Not nearly enough. Once you get them trained in those professions, then what? Besides, are we now expecting Newfoundland to provide the primary education for the rest of the country's work force? Newfoundland's population is declining as it is.

There is employment mobility so that labour is free to travel between provinces. If not for barriers, excess labour in Newfoundland and other provinces would freely move to where the need is. This is a mutual benefit for both parties. We should not expect a single province to supplement the resource shortages of other provinces, however we should expect that the excess labour from any province is redeployed where it makes sense.

[Wilber]

There is employment mobility so that labour is free to travel between provinces. If not for barriers, excess labour in Newfoundland and other provinces would freely move to where the need is. This is a mutual benefit for both parties. We should not expect a single province to supplement the resource shortages of other provinces, however we should expect that the excess labour from any province is redeployed where it makes sense.

Of course. I've been across the country and back and gone offshore to stay employed. My point is that someone has to educate the population and you can't expect others to do it for you.

[Live From China]

however we should expect that the excess labour from any province is redeployed where it makes sense.

How could that be done?

[Renegade]

How could that be done?

IMO it is done by market forces. If you look at the example of Alberta, there are labour shortages resulting in high-wage rates. In Newfoundland the opposite is true, there is surplus labour and high unemployment and correspondingly low wage rates, thus many Newfoundland workers move to Alberta to take on jobs. The redeployment would be greater if there wern't artificial incentives (eg EI) to stay.

[Renegade]

My point is that someone has to educate the population and you can't expect others to do it for you.

Ultimately people bear their own responsiblity for the skills they bring to the market. It is not "someone" else's respnsiblity to educate them, that responsiblity lies with the individual.