Canadian Money Forum banner

1501 - 1520 of 1558 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
210 Posts
I agree that the current system is terrible because it can't distinguish between people who need GIS because of their life circumstances and those who were flatly irresponsible with money. The problems also exist with OAS. For example, my parents are wealthy yet they get OAS, which is totally absurd.

I think the government should reform OAS and GIS. If it were me, I would completely get rid of these programs and instead boost CPP from 10% to 15-20%. This means the money would come from people's wages in their working life rather than general tax revenues, so it would greatly help the government with its budget. And then, if it doesn't exist already, modify CPP so spouses who didn't work much (stay-at-home parents) can benefit from their working spouse's CPP even after the spouse passes away.

Sadly it means more forced savings which I'm generally against, however I prefer forcing people to save more than having my tax dollars used to support people in their old age.

edit: corrected GIC --> GIS. I suck at accronyms!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,212 Posts
GIS serves an important purpose. What if someone is widowed and their spouse was the main income earner? Increasing CPP won't help in that situation. I would say get rid of OAS for sure, and use the savings to increase GIS. Increasing CPP is also a good idea though.

UBI is a non-starter... but some form of GMI (guaranteed minimum income) is a likely outcome. Even at that I'm guessing the amount would be quite small.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,378 Posts
GIS serves an important purpose. What if someone is widowed and their spouse was the main income earner? Increasing CPP won't help in that situation. I would say get rid of OAS for sure, and use the savings to increase GIS. Increasing CPP is also a good idea though.

UBI is a non-starter... but some form of GMI (guaranteed minimum income) is a likely outcome. Even at that I'm guessing the amount would be quite small.
All but the craziest would start small. But remember, this is Canada, once you get 35%+ of the vote, you're in majority government territory.

Promise to increase the GMI/UBI and you'll win again and again.

This is why Ontario Teachers are among the highest paid in the world, you win the teachers union, you win the election
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,075 Posts
I would be interested in an audit of the CPP to see if benefits being currently paid are relative to the size of the fund.

The fund has exceeded benchmarks for a long time and the fund is much higher than was ever projected.

As the fund grew and the benchmarks were beat.......there was a compounding effect.

A higher return on a larger amount of money.......should increase benefits.

The CPPIB say they don't consider such matters. It isn't within their mandate.

So the fund could grow to $100 Trillion dollars and people would still collect an average of $500 a month.

If the benefits can't be increased.....so be it, but at least we should know the numbers.

I think for sure though, the death benefit of $2500 maximum should be increased.

That might have been sufficient 30 years ago, but isn't even close now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,727 Posts
I would be interested in an audit of the CPP to see if benefits being currently paid are relative to the size of the fund.

The fund has exceeded benchmarks for a long time and the fund is much higher than was ever projected.
Pension accounting is tricky. A few years of good performance aren't the end of the story.

This has been a great few years for the CPP, which is excellent, but it doesn't automatically mean they can boost future payouts. Would you also want them to reduce payouts if we get a stretch of a few bad years?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,378 Posts
Pension accounting is tricky. A few years of good performance aren't the end of the story.

This has been a great few years for the CPP, which is excellent, but it doesn't automatically mean they can boost future payouts. Would you also want them to reduce payouts if we get a stretch of a few bad years?
Pension account is nearly impossible.
What if there is a new breakthrough and lives are dramatically extended?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,951 Posts
Pension accounting is tricky. A few years of good performance aren't the end of the story.

This has been a great few years for the CPP, which is excellent, but it doesn't automatically mean they can boost future payouts. Would you also want them to reduce payouts if we get a stretch of a few bad years?
CPP has massively outperformed what they need to do to be actuarially sustainable. Assuming we don't have any massive surprises on lifespan.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
503 Posts
I honestly don't know how to solve the reality that too many people didn't save for retirement.
Forced savings (ie. bigger CPP) is the least unfair solution I can see. It's not very popular because it's a "pay now, collect much later" deal but it does help with people who just spend all the money they have and later need handouts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,951 Posts
Forced savings (ie. bigger CPP) is the least unfair solution I can see. It's not very popular because it's a "pay now, collect much later" deal but it does help with people who just spend all the money they have and later need handouts.
We are overpaying now to compensate for underfunding by Greatest Generation and Boomers. The CPP expansion is at least more actuarially fair. Prior to that, 60% of CPP contributions were paying for your pension, 40% was to compensate for prior undercontribution.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,378 Posts
We are overpaying now to compensate for underfunding by Greatest Generation and Boomers. The CPP expansion is at least more actuarially fair. Prior to that, 60% of CPP contributions were paying for your pension, 40% was to compensate for prior undercontribution.
Yup, I'm spending my working years paying for the irresponsibility of my parents generation, and we have a slew of young people who want UBI so they don't have to work, and expect us to pay for that too.

To be fair, boomers based their assumption on.
1. Stable birthrate. This changed with birth control and widespread abortion.
2. Continued strong growth. This wasn't sustainable, there was massive innovation, and a dramatic increase in the available workforce.

I'm not saying innovation and productivity growth is not happening, but throughout history, you can see that productivity growth isn't a straight line, it's very bumpy.

In retrospect those assumptions were wrong, but they seemed okay at the time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,286 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1,512 ·
Now Matt, thanks to Justin and his $400B, we’ve more than screwed the next generation...outdoing what our parents did to us...and remember, we’re not done yet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,075 Posts
It was baby boomers who built up the CPP fund while paying the benefits for the previous generation, but they have not received a good return on their contributions. I was born in 1950 and paid the maximum into the CPP for 40 years of uninterrupted work. My employers also contributed for those 40 years.

The return on my contributions looks about 2%.

That is pretty shabby considering the CPP gained much more than 2% returns for decades.

The CPP returned over 10% net earnings annually over the past 10 years.

They are earning substantial returns on witheld boomer money.

21476
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,075 Posts
Now look at these numbers from the CPPIB. Sharp increases in the fund to $1.8 Trillion by 2040.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,378 Posts
Now Matt, thanks to Justin and his $400B, we’ve more than screwed the next generation...outdoing what our parents did to us...and remember, we’re not done yet.
Well I'm in my prime working years, so yeah it hurts.

It's going to hit the millenials that voted for Trudeau pretty hard, which they deserve having voted for that idiot.

I feel really bad for the school aged kids who are going to try and start lives in the mess millenials made.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,075 Posts
All the roads, bridges, highways, water treatment plants, parks, schools, universities, hospitals, and every other thing that past generations have built over the past 155 years, while acquiring est. $1.4 Trillion in debt........which is $600 billion less than the one bill just passed by Congress for $1.9 Trillion........and you guys think Canada is in terrible shape ?

A little perspective needed here........
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,951 Posts
It's going to hit the millenials that voted for Trudeau pretty hard, which they deserve having voted for that idiot.
Wait, are we pretending the Conservatives would not have done anything to support the economy and Canadians? Balanced budget this year? Hilarious!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,286 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1,518 ·
So, because someone else would screw up, that makes it okay for others to as well? No wonder so many people are begging for ubi.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,378 Posts
Wait, are we pretending the Conservatives would not have done anything to support the economy and Canadians? Balanced budget this year? Hilarious!
Even excluding the COVID spending, Trudeau has been reckless , even before COVID he was pretty clear that he had no intention of ever balancing the budget.

I do think a massive spend during this crisis is appropriate. I even said back last year that the Trudeau emergency support handouts weren't enough.

Trudeau didn't care about government finances before the COVID crisis, and now he's just using it as an incredibly convenient excuse to continue his irresponsible ways.
Like come one, he could at LEAST put out a budget.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,286 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1,520 ·
when income is the same as debt payments the budget will balance itself.
 
1501 - 1520 of 1558 Posts
Top