Even though the age pattern in spending is presently out-of-whack, the government is showing progress in delivering concrete policies that will make lives better for young people
Some Millennials are now in their forties. “Now is the time?” Now it’s too late. These generations have missed so many milestones. We don’t need “progress in delivering policies” - whatever the hell that means. We need to afford a house, food, and other necessities for life. We want to start families of our own. At this point, we all know nothing will happen.
Don’t worry! I’m sure our habit of having amazing electoral foresight by voting in the Other Team when the Current Team upsets us too much won’t affect our future too much.
Especially since, right now, the Other Team is the business-friendly, tax-cutting-for-the-wealthy one. Once we elect them like the super geniuses we are, they will fix everything for us.
But he said build the home!
Just like they fixed it for us the last time, yep!
Thank you Canada, now tell that to your mentally disturbed neighbour please 🥺
Interesting article that goes far more into depth than I was anticipating.
If you’re curious about the actual tax rates and burdens (ie when boomers were working age, there was 7 to ever 1 retiree, now we’re around 3:1) I’d recommend reading it.
There’s definitely going to be some harder times ahead regardless of how taxes are structured just because of how much older people are when they die, and all the extra healthcare burden associated with that.
I would love to hear the globe and mail explain how their beloved Conservative party will fix this. Let me guess, reduce taxes? Ahh, now I have a house!
By what I’ve seen of Pierre Poilievre, his plan will be to steam roll and argue with journalists and never answer a question. Dude is so unlikeable, and looks like a complete snob, male Karen.
The “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy except as a Conservative governing method. If you are facing poverty, the Tories don’t want to hear 'bout it.
Or he might take a page from Doug Ford’s book and try to “solve” the crisis by changing the definitions of “houses” so the statistics look better.
Just declare that all cars count as houses and we’ll suddenly have a surplus!
I remember during the great recession they CPC put up a bunch of signs proclaiming ‘Canada’s action plan’ while no actual plans existed.
This is still their MO, from municipal to national. They will talk loudly about how they’re solving it with no actual action. You will see a daily YouTube and Television ads talking about the Conservative Housing Action Plan, but you will never see any homes being built because of it.
This is still their MO, from municipal to national. They will talk loudly about how they’re solving it with no actual action.
Hell, go to their website. Here’s what you see below ‘Buy Our Merch’ and Donate:
- Just the facts: Trudeau fails to build the homes Canadians need (April 19th, 2024)
- Justin Trudeau is NOT WORTH the cost (April 17, 2024)
- Trudeau’s latest attempt to CENSOR the internet (April 11th, 2024)
Send Justin Trudeau a message, donate today!
So just to be clear Conservatives, if you’re elected, Justin Trudeau will fail to build houses? Truly incredible plan, guys.
LOL, they’re not going to reduce your taxes, silly plebe
The most insane part to me is that the minimum threshold to start cutting back OAS is $80,000 when it’s only $35,000 for the CCB. This should be flipped, a fundamental requirement of the CCB is that you have a whole extra person (or more) to take care of. How does it make any sense that a senior needs more than double to live on than a whole family?
Considering the median individual income in Canada is close to $45k, that’s a good point. Maybe there’s an argument that seniors have additional living expenses with healthcare or living in an assisted living or full-time care facility, but I feel like it should then be a lower OAS clawback with supports available for those with particularly high expenses.
Or we could subsidize the health care and the assisted living, etc. facilities directly. I wonder if anyone’s actually done a study on which is more expensive. (Of course, any attempt to do this would probably make certain whiny premiers raise even more jurisdictional issues.)
What are OAS and CCB? Child care benefit tax is my guess for CCB
Child care benefit and Old age security. They’re both benefits paid out periodically throughout the year.
(They were also both in the article)
Surely 30 year amortizations will fix the system!
This is the best summary I could come up with:
This trend accelerated in the new millennium when average home prices rose 60 per cent during prime minister Stephen Harper’s nine years in office (2006-2015), according to Canadian Real Estate data.
We’re starting out behind, because provincial and federal governments did not set aside enough of the boomers’ tax dollars to fully cover the cost of publicly funded income and medical benefits as that generation retires.
At $29-billion, interest payments on unpaid bills left to younger Canadians and future generations is the only part of the federal budget that rivals spending increases on boomers’ retirement.
So the near doubling of federal OAS spending over the first eight years of Mr. Trudeau’s term would have occurred regardless, and continuing increases were already baked into the fiscal framework – although not quite at the pace announced in the latest budget.
There are few realistic options to eliminate structural deficits without putting younger generations in even more jeopardy if we don’t require some additional taxation from affluent folks my age and older (I’ll turn 50 this summer).
But it is fair to say these initial steps set in motion a grand national project to renew our commitment to preserve a healthy childhood, home, retirement and planet so we all leave a legacy of which we can all be proud.
The original article contains 2,269 words, the summary contains 216 words. Saved 90%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
