As a 75 year old ,single, retired nurse I completely agree with you. During my working years I was able to pay off the mortgage on my condo and save for retirement. I am the product of a very privileged generation. There are some seniors living in poverty and we should help them, but beyond that all the help should go younger generations who are struggling with the cost of living.
I agree with you. But I would go much further. Clawback currently starts at an individual's net income of $90K. Since seniors can split pension and RRIF income, a couple will likely equalize their income, so for them, clawback starts at $180,000 of joint income. Just think. Couples receiving $180,000 a year do not have to give back their OAS except in the normal course of raxation.
I think that the clawback point should be halved, to $45,000 per person or $90,000 per couple. The savings could be used to enrich and extend the GIS, which targets the truly needy.
Of course, there are political problems. Voter participation is much higher for the old than for the young, so it is attractive politically to target benefits at the old. Most young people are not paying attention, and as a result don't care.
1. How giving the Liberals an ultimatum for a major increase in spending and a one month deadline for making that happen - i.e. crafting the legislation and getting it passed by the Senate (which normally takes months) - does anything but make the Bloc look disingenuous. The Bloc leader knows a one month deadline isn't feasible for this, even if the Liberals supported it in principle.
2. If the Bloc leader really cared about seniors under 75 receiving more, why didn't he raise this in 2022 when the Liberals raised OAS for the 75+ age group. He's been sitting on this for over two years? I don't believe this for a second.
3. How is threatening to bring down a progressive government in a month going to give the Bloc what it allegedly wants, when doing so only helps Poilievre who has voted against every financial support since CERB, and will never honour the Bloc's motion for raising OAS for seniors under 75,
None of this adds up.
Furthermore, Trudeau is principled beyond his rejection of the Bloc's motion. He is the only leader who hasn't flip-flopped on carbon pricing which is foundational to moving away from fossil fuels; and you can include Poilievre among the flip-flopping hypocrites because he supported a carbon tax multiple times in his career. As did Stephen Harper who first proposed the carbon tax in 2008. Of course, Poilievre will never honour the Bloc's motion, he wants spending ended. That Poilievre supported a motion contradicting his own campaign is just proof Poilievre has no principles. He only voted for this because he will support any measure that facilitates bringing down the government.
The Bloc, the NDP, and the CPC are unprincipled populist jerks and I can't support any of them.
Um... the Liberals did exempt home heating oil from the carbon tax. That was mainly to garner votes in the Atlantic Provinces, as Minister Gudie Hutchings publicly admitted. The Liberals said it was because of the financial hardship the carbon tax would otherwise cause. But once you start down that slippery road...
They exempted home heating oil temporarily in one region. And Gudie Hutchings was full of erroneous stupidity when she claimed any province that elected liberal MLAs would get the break. There is no constitutional relationship between provincial parties calling themselves "liberal" and the federal Liberal Party. The BC Liberals now calling itself BC United were never liberal. How that bozo became a cabinet minister is beyond comprehension.
It's so easy to tell the age of commentators on this suggestion. "Don't do it it'll cost too much" …
As if maintaining the status-quo is built in. How about lowering the cut off income before OAS is offered? Then increase it for them that 10% (or more depending on the cut off). Seniors do not need federal money to spend in Florida or Arizona. But those with the greatest need would spend it at home and we would all benefit.
It looks like an easier way than increasing OAS to meet the needs of needy seniors between 65 & 70 is to look to the GIS which is already geared to the poorest seniors. That way no one is financing snowbirds but makes sure the poorest don't need to eat pet food.
OAS has an income threshold for entitlement that is adjusted to the cost of living every year. If one's income is beyond the threshold, the funds are clawed back. I experienced this clawback for two years after I retired because my income in those years precluded me from keeping the money. I paid funds back in 2021 in my tax bill, and monthly amounts were deducted from my OAS cheques in 2022 until I'd made restitution.
So what you're suggesting is already built in. I wish people would READ about how OAS actually works.
Why are you still talking about housing costs. NOT FEDERAL! The BoC are already lowering interest rates which should aid developers. But the results are 5-10 yrs in the future. Sure CMHC could lower mortgage requirements, but there is no supply. Ban corporations or individuals fro owning multiple properties. That would be tied upon in the courts for the same 5-10 yrs.
They were right to say no to the bloc on this, but going hogwild on some sort of campaign that prioritizes the young over the old makes zero sense. The old vote; the young don’t … comparatively
As a 75 year old ,single, retired nurse I completely agree with you. During my working years I was able to pay off the mortgage on my condo and save for retirement. I am the product of a very privileged generation. There are some seniors living in poverty and we should help them, but beyond that all the help should go younger generations who are struggling with the cost of living.
I agree with you. But I would go much further. Clawback currently starts at an individual's net income of $90K. Since seniors can split pension and RRIF income, a couple will likely equalize their income, so for them, clawback starts at $180,000 of joint income. Just think. Couples receiving $180,000 a year do not have to give back their OAS except in the normal course of raxation.
I think that the clawback point should be halved, to $45,000 per person or $90,000 per couple. The savings could be used to enrich and extend the GIS, which targets the truly needy.
Of course, there are political problems. Voter participation is much higher for the old than for the young, so it is attractive politically to target benefits at the old. Most young people are not paying attention, and as a result don't care.
The Bloc needs to explain:
1. How giving the Liberals an ultimatum for a major increase in spending and a one month deadline for making that happen - i.e. crafting the legislation and getting it passed by the Senate (which normally takes months) - does anything but make the Bloc look disingenuous. The Bloc leader knows a one month deadline isn't feasible for this, even if the Liberals supported it in principle.
2. If the Bloc leader really cared about seniors under 75 receiving more, why didn't he raise this in 2022 when the Liberals raised OAS for the 75+ age group. He's been sitting on this for over two years? I don't believe this for a second.
3. How is threatening to bring down a progressive government in a month going to give the Bloc what it allegedly wants, when doing so only helps Poilievre who has voted against every financial support since CERB, and will never honour the Bloc's motion for raising OAS for seniors under 75,
None of this adds up.
Furthermore, Trudeau is principled beyond his rejection of the Bloc's motion. He is the only leader who hasn't flip-flopped on carbon pricing which is foundational to moving away from fossil fuels; and you can include Poilievre among the flip-flopping hypocrites because he supported a carbon tax multiple times in his career. As did Stephen Harper who first proposed the carbon tax in 2008. Of course, Poilievre will never honour the Bloc's motion, he wants spending ended. That Poilievre supported a motion contradicting his own campaign is just proof Poilievre has no principles. He only voted for this because he will support any measure that facilitates bringing down the government.
The Bloc, the NDP, and the CPC are unprincipled populist jerks and I can't support any of them.
Um... the Liberals did exempt home heating oil from the carbon tax. That was mainly to garner votes in the Atlantic Provinces, as Minister Gudie Hutchings publicly admitted. The Liberals said it was because of the financial hardship the carbon tax would otherwise cause. But once you start down that slippery road...
They exempted home heating oil temporarily in one region. And Gudie Hutchings was full of erroneous stupidity when she claimed any province that elected liberal MLAs would get the break. There is no constitutional relationship between provincial parties calling themselves "liberal" and the federal Liberal Party. The BC Liberals now calling itself BC United were never liberal. How that bozo became a cabinet minister is beyond comprehension.
It's so easy to tell the age of commentators on this suggestion. "Don't do it it'll cost too much" …
As if maintaining the status-quo is built in. How about lowering the cut off income before OAS is offered? Then increase it for them that 10% (or more depending on the cut off). Seniors do not need federal money to spend in Florida or Arizona. But those with the greatest need would spend it at home and we would all benefit.
It looks like an easier way than increasing OAS to meet the needs of needy seniors between 65 & 70 is to look to the GIS which is already geared to the poorest seniors. That way no one is financing snowbirds but makes sure the poorest don't need to eat pet food.
OAS has an income threshold for entitlement that is adjusted to the cost of living every year. If one's income is beyond the threshold, the funds are clawed back. I experienced this clawback for two years after I retired because my income in those years precluded me from keeping the money. I paid funds back in 2021 in my tax bill, and monthly amounts were deducted from my OAS cheques in 2022 until I'd made restitution.
So what you're suggesting is already built in. I wish people would READ about how OAS actually works.
Perhaps read what I am suggesting …
Don't see the point of what you're suggesting at all. It's both redundant and more costly.
Why are you still talking about housing costs. NOT FEDERAL! The BoC are already lowering interest rates which should aid developers. But the results are 5-10 yrs in the future. Sure CMHC could lower mortgage requirements, but there is no supply. Ban corporations or individuals fro owning multiple properties. That would be tied upon in the courts for the same 5-10 yrs.
He shouldn't have run on housing twice then if he didn't want to get held accountable for it.
https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/local-news/election-2021-has-the-trudeau-liberals-national-housing-strategy-benefited-bc-4299312
They were right to say no to the bloc on this, but going hogwild on some sort of campaign that prioritizes the young over the old makes zero sense. The old vote; the young don’t … comparatively
The young are what got him a majority in 2015. Then he failed them and they never came back.
Doing something for them may get them.