Toronto Girlfriends
Toronto Escorts

Pension Reform

Rockslinger

Banned
Apr 24, 2005
32,783
0
0
What are your thoughts on pension reform? I think the government is creating too much of a nanny state. Personally, I think there should be NO employer or government pension. We are all adults and capable of managing our own money so we can retire healthy, wealthy and wise. BTW Guess who is paying for the rich pension plans of municipal, provincial and federal employees?
 

johnny

New member
Feb 12, 2002
232
0
0
What are your thoughts on pension reform? I think the government is creating too much of a nanny state. Personally, I think there should be NO employer or government pension. We are all adults and capable of managing our own money so we can retire healthy, wealthy and wise. BTW Guess who is paying for the rich pension plans of municipal, provincial and federal employees?
While I agree with you that we are becoming to much of a nanny state and that expanding mandatory government pension CPP is wrong, I do not agree that there should be no employer pensions. Employer pensions are part of your compensation package and are intended to provide a salary for whan you cannot earn anymore. With life expectancy becoming older and older, a salary while not working when you are older is needed. Pensions really have only been in wide spread exsitence since the 50's, before that you pretty much worked until you died, so no need for a salary when too old to work.
We live in a society that takes care of its people. Its great that you can save for your retirement, but what if even 10% of the workforce didnt save, do you say screw them let them starve? is it survival of the fittest? I would say that most people would agree that taxes are too high in canada...hst coming in tommorow.....but at the same time social programs increase the standard of living. We cannot have poor destitute elderly people in their 80's and tell them its their own fault that they didnt save. I understand where you are coming from the point of view that everyone take personal responsibility adn i think poeple should, but unfortunately, it really doesnt work that way.
here is my suggestion taken from the Reform Party bak in the 90's. Instead of the CPP that we contribute a decent amount for the small pension we get in return, what we shoudl do is still have a mandatiry contribution on our pay, but it goes into individual accounts. So lets say the $2163.15 that most of us contribute to the CPP goes into a super RRSP. That accumulated amount at retirement would be more valuable then the maximum benefit amout of $937.

I hate the nanny state, the government telling you what to do and when to do it because its for your own good.......
 

ogibowt

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2008
5,929
2,411
113
it really is a stretch to call CPP part of the nanny state...after all both employers and employees are the contributors, no?..but i guess, neo cons cant see past their nose....civilized societies, have all devised, some kind of retirement benefits, be it public or private or both..to advocate abolition of both is a horrible step backward..
 

Rockslinger

Banned
Apr 24, 2005
32,783
0
0
A couple of good posts above. My concern is that I have seen the meltdown of two "cradle to grave" systems in my lifetime. One is the Soviet system which broke down in the 1980's. Now we are witnessing the breakdown of the Western European model.
 

johnny

New member
Feb 12, 2002
232
0
0
it really is a stretch to call CPP part of the nanny state...after all both employers and employees are the contributors, no?..but i guess, neo cons cant see past their nose....civilized societies, have all devised, some kind of retirement benefits, be it public or private or both..to advocate abolition of both is a horrible step backward..
I dont think it is either, but i think the expansion of the CPP is getting closer to the nanny state. When a government thinks it knows better what to do with your money thatn what you do, then that is a nanny state.
 

ogibowt

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2008
5,929
2,411
113
make no mistake Rockslinger..there was never a cradle to grave system in the soviet union..only brutal totalitarianism...the closest model could be the scandinavian countries..the soviets only suffered through cradle to grave poverty...
 

ogibowt

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2008
5,929
2,411
113
I dont think it is either, but i think the expansion of the CPP is getting closer to the nanny state. When a government thinks it knows better what to do with your money thatn what you do, then that is a nanny state.
when we try to "bail " out seniors we call it a nanny state, when we "bail" out car compannies its called sound economic policy..very confusing to this leftie..
 

out4fun

Active member
Jan 8, 2008
977
42
28
what if there was only a national pension program that everyone paid into - private sector employers and employees along with public sector employees - contributions and benefits based on income - no separate pension plans allowed for public employees - teachers, police, politicians, etc would receive the same pensions as their private sector equivalent earners.
 

Rockslinger

Banned
Apr 24, 2005
32,783
0
0
what if there was only a national pension program that everyone paid into - private sector employers and employees along with public sector employees - contributions and benefits based on income - no separate pension plans allowed for public employees - teachers, police, politicians, etc would receive the same pensions as their private sector equivalent earners.
Yes, this would make sense. This means that everybody is on the same level playing field.
 

hinz

New member
Nov 27, 2006
5,672
1
0
Personally I prefer increasing TFSA contribution room, like the one suggested below, to increasing either CPP or RRSP contribution rooms to 34%.

http://www.financialpost.com/personal-finance/your-money/branch-investments/story.html?id=1851202

Simply put, I would rather have my nest egg tax sheltered and take the money out tax free like TFSA, instead of tax deferred like RRSP/DC plan/Group RRSP, in which the governments will take their cut and force you to take out the min payment no matter what once the RRSP convert to RRIF.

WRT increasing contribution to CPP, CPP works just fine based on current, sound contributions rate, management and actuarial assumptions. There is no need to demand Canadians to dole out additional contribution to what is essentially a super size indexed annuity, back by the federal government.

The last thing I want is being forced to contribute more of my hard earn money to CPP, while the federal government is essentially betting and hoping I am not healthy enough to be around, keep collecting or in their eyes depleting the CPP up to the ripe old age of 100. :rolleyes:

Having said that, I am all for CPP and it's indispensable to maintain min. standard of living, NOT replacing your nest eggs like the leftie politicians and their unions try very hard to do so. Individuals must take the responsibilities to fund their bulk of nest eggs too.
 

out4fun

Active member
Jan 8, 2008
977
42
28
Yes, this would make sense. This means that everybody is on the same level playing field.
It would also stop the public sector unions from raping the country. The public sector will be the next big bubble to burst around the world.
 

out4fun

Active member
Jan 8, 2008
977
42
28
Already happening in Greece, Spain, Portugal, Italy, etc. The "European Model" is crushing under its own weight.
I fear the day of reckoning in the USA. Someday the wheels will come off and then we'll see an even bigger recession.
 

Rockslinger

Banned
Apr 24, 2005
32,783
0
0
I fear the day of reckoning in the USA. Someday the wheels will come off and then we'll see an even bigger recession.
The U.S. government is technically insolvent. 8 million unemployed (but armed to the teeth). 90% of Americans are only 2 paycheques away from homelessness. Why do the Mexicans keep coming? The U.K is probably in the same boat.
 

out4fun

Active member
Jan 8, 2008
977
42
28
The U.S. government is technically insolvent. 8 million unemployed (but armed to the teeth). 90% of Americans are only 2 paycheques away from homelessness. Why do the Mexicans keep coming? The U.K is probably in the same boat.
They're not insolvent yet. You aren't insolvent until people stop lending you money. Eventually, the day will come. You can't continually outspend your income and go on indefinitely.
 

poseidol

Member
Mar 8, 2010
325
2
18
What are your thoughts on pension reform? I think the government is creating too much of a nanny state. Personally, I think there should be NO employer or government pension. We are all adults and capable of managing our own money so we can retire healthy, wealthy and wise. BTW Guess who is paying for the rich pension plans of municipal, provincial and federal employees?
I'm in disagreement with the "no pension" deal, but also disagree with a pension reform. I am loathe to give up more of my hard-earned dollars to a corrupt, bloated and inefficient government that already takes 50% of my earnings. That said, here's what I propose:

- a flat tax system (whereby the most anyone would pay is 25% of your total gross). I understand that Hong Kong has a flat tax system in place.
- massive reduction of useless government programs (such as the gun registry)
- focus on using funds for ONLY basic services (like healthcare, infrastructure (roads, sewers), police/military, electricity/power, tax collection, pension)

You do those, and then we have more than enough money for pensions for everyone in the country
 

afterhours

New member
Jul 14, 2009
6,323
2
0
Personally, I think there should be NO employer or government pension. We are all adults and capable of managing our own money so we can retire healthy, wealthy and wise.
 

duang

Active member
Apr 17, 2007
1,121
0
36
I'm in disagreement with the "no pension" deal, but also disagree with a pension reform. I am loathe to give up more of my hard-earned dollars to a corrupt, bloated and inefficient government that already takes 50% of my earnings. That said, here's what I propose:

- a flat tax system (whereby the most anyone would pay is 25% of your total gross). I understand that Hong Kong has a flat tax system in place.
- massive reduction of useless government programs (such as the gun registry)
- focus on using funds for ONLY basic services (like healthcare, infrastructure (roads, sewers), police/military, electricity/power, tax collection, pension)

You do those, and then we have more than enough money for pensions for everyone in the country
Have to agree: those bozos in goverment can run anything more inefficiently than the private sector so the less they do the better.

The other ideas are great but make too much sense for them to consider and would be fought by too many groups with vested interests [i.e. bureacrats, unions, etc.].

D.
 
Toronto Escorts