371 replies to this topic

[capricorn]

Exactly. There wasn't supposed to be details in this speech. It was simply to let everyone know that something was coming.

I also think Harper wanted to show some leadership at this meeting by giving a broad outline of his plans for pension reform in Canada hoping some countries would follow suit. This was no secret to Canadians as he raised pension reform in a recent Mansbridge interview.

Harper's pension comments start at the 17.:27 mark. He also mentions public service and MP pensions

http://www.cbc.ca/thenational/mansbridge/

edit to add video link

Edited by capricorn, 27 January 2012 - 01:52 PM.

[Topaz]

I just checked on CTV and CBC polls and CTV's had 1305 voting 434- 33% yes, 870- 67% NO, CBC- 1600- 290-18.1 yes 1250-78% NO and 62-3.87% not sure. So far the polls say NO and I wonder if Harper will think twice about this or will he see the same thing happen when he shut down Parliament.

[PIK]

I just checked on CTV and CBC polls and CTV's had 1305 voting 434- 33% yes, 870- 67% NO, CBC- 1600- 290-18.1 yes 1250-78% NO and 62-3.87% not sure. So far the polls say NO and I wonder if Harper will think twice about this or will he see the same thing happen when he shut down Parliament.

Does not matter what the people think, this is something that has to be done now, not later ,but now. Really what we should be doing is reviewing the languge issue multiculturism and immigration and that alone would be enough to fix most of the countries problems.

[waldo]

Wow, something I can agree with waldo on. I would assume that it would have to be grandfathered in. Raising the age to 66 for people 55 - 40, and than to 67 for everyone under 40. Something like that.

It needs to be done.

no - at this stage I most certainly don't accept anything Conservatives are 'floating' on this. This simply strikes as opportunism and piecemeal. At the very least, given their track record, significant independent scrutiny on the Conservative numbers and estimates needs to be forthcoming. For something described as 2030 unsustainable, just how does a 2-year extension on OAS benefits make it... sustainable? Oh wait... you mean it's only a part of a concerted effort on several fronts? Really? What other fronts/avenues will make OAS sustainable by 2030... adding to the 'floated' 2-year eligibility extension suggestion? What other possibilities have been considered as an alternative to simply raising the benefit age?

given questions of decreasing longevity and decreased quality of health, I suggest the last thing the government should be considering is tapping into some degree of established social contract during the last life phase of Canadians.

[waldo]

But the seniors better not get to upset, because alot that are collecting did not pay enough in for what they get.

citation request - qualification on "a lot", "pay enough" and "what they get"

[waldo]

Really what we should be doing is reviewing the languge issue multiculturism and immigration and that alone would be enough to fix most of the countries problems.

pfffft!

[Peeves]

Extremely predictable, it's started allready...

The current system is unsustainable considering the aging population and so on, but I doubt it will be as draconian as the usual culprits are speculating it will be. Certainly I hope it's not as draconian as Paul Martin's proposed Seniors' Benefit which went down in flames to major opposition. I can't imagine that PM Harper would go that far.

So far we have no clue as to what wait happen, As far as the age 67 bit, I would expect maybe something similar to the CPP, or some incentives to delay taking the OAS - I'll reserve judgment until we get some facts.

Mulroney government pension reforms were shot down as were Cretiens by anger response. I wonder if attitudes have changed along with the financial times ?

However it's implemented over probably several years, there had better be a serious reduction in MP pensions to start.

[Peeves]

pfffft!

Hey nothing to pfffft at, lots of room there for consideration.

Our refugee programs and 'illegals' programs to. 15 years to kick a liar and cheat out of the country with appeal after appeal after appeal is expensive.

Phonie refugee claim hearings after hearings while benefits are paid for years. I think Harper has made strides, but if we're looking to cut costs...pensions, let's look at other programs that might save monies and soften some of the pension woes.

[Peeves]

citation request - qualification on "a lot", "pay enough" and "what they get"

What about inmates?
"Motion 507 reads as follows: “That, in the opinion of the House, the government should prohibit the payment of Old Age Security and Guaranteed Income Supplement payments to individuals serving life sentences for multiple murders, except where the individual is released from prison, and allocate the proceeds to a Victims Compensation Program administered by the provinces.”"

And not too many moons ago...
Didn't the NDP want OAS after a short term in Canada? Talk about out of touch with reality.

"Aug. 30,2011: I am disappointed to see that NDP Deputy Leader Libby Davies recently introduced a Private Member's proposal that would cost Canadian taxpayers a billion dollars and give expensive taxpayer-funded benefits to those who may have never paid any taxes in Canada and do not deserve them.

The NDP has now joined hands with the Liberals in asking the government to reduce the residency requirement to receive taxpayer-funded Old Age Security. The Liberals and NDP want us to reduce the residency requirement from 10 years to only a few short years.

This would mean that someone who only recently arrived in Canada would receive Old Age Security and a Guaranteed Income Supplement, just like someone who has worked hard for 10 years or more, paid taxes, and contributed to Canadian society."

http://www.portstanleynews.com/details/headline.aspx?menu=1024_News_Editorials_NDP+Reintroduces+Costly+Old+Age+Security+Bill

Edited by Peeves, 27 January 2012 - 02:47 PM.

[punked]

Does not matter what the people think, this is something that has to be done now, not later ,but now. Really what we should be doing is reviewing the languge issue multiculturism and immigration and that alone would be enough to fix most of the countries problems.

It does matter what the people think, it always matters what the people think. Is this what conservatives believe?

[guyser]

Really what we should be doing is reviewing the languge issue multiculturism and immigration and that alone would be enough to fix most of the countries problems.

Not even close.

You voted for the wrong party then, since Conservatives increased the number of immigrants.

[Shady]

Set an example and do it to the politicians first.

Fine with me.

[Smallc]

It does matter what the people think, it always matters what the people think. Is this what conservatives believe?

Sometimes, people think the wrong thing. The reality is, we have a federal government that only spends $80B on programs. We can't afford pension transfers that cost more than that. We need to reign in spending and lower taxes at the federal level so that the provinces have room to raise taxes and carry out their obligations.

[Smallc]

Fine with me.

I think it's fine with many politicians too, especially the fiscally conservative ones (mostly Conservatives and some Liberals).

[punked]

Sometimes, people think the wrong thing. The reality is, we have a federal government that only spends $80B on programs. We can't afford pension transfers that cost more than that. We need to reign in spending and lower taxes at the federal level so that the provinces have room to raise taxes and carry out their obligations.

Smallc we can do anything our country decides the question is are willing to pay the cost?