Article View: can.consumers
Article #2205Re: CPP:A Retro Plan
From: nsnu
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 00:00
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 00:00
54 lines
3160 bytes
3160 bytes
In article <55aoo3$nqn@freenet-news.carleton.ca>, bn207@FreeNet.Carleton.CA says... > > >Ben Singer (singer@julian.uwo.ca) writes: >> Given that a number of younger people resent the rather small CPP >> payments to retirees (compare with most Western countries) and wish to > >They are not that "small", PLUS the government has squandered the fund as >low-interest loans to the provinces. > >> withdraw them, thus reneging on a committment many depended upon--ok, >> fair enough (or, perhaps, unfair enough). But let's be consistent: let's >> establish an "entitlements account" for each individual and, first of >> all, tally the amount put into the retirees account from the beginning >> and pay him that back with compounded interest. Then, let's tally up the >> child support payments made to the mothers of the present generation, >> along with the overly generous unemployment benefits (in many cases >> leisure benefits) and compound the interest on these over the years and >> bill the recipients for this cost (I suspect that the CPP recipients in a >> high proportion of the cases paid high taxes to support such persons >> while themselves not gaining any, or very few, benefits of this nature). > >No one has paid higher taxes in Canada than the people working today and >the taxes they are paying are not coming back to them now or in the future. > >> That's the point: those who are complaining the most include many who >> were fully supported by older individuals who could have put those funds >> into future retirement annuities. Let's have a little social symmetry > >Let's have some SUSTAINABILITY. Each generation should pay for >themselves. Any other strategy falls apart when demographics change. I >don't think individual accounts would ever work though. For one thing, >everyone would have to try and save enough to live on to a very old age >(e.g. 85), whereas the intent of the program is to ensure that people have >some type of pension income while they are alive. Since the average life >expectancy is much less than what each person would try to save enough >for, a pooled approach like CPP is better. Howver, those funds should be >kept out of government hands and managed professionally. > >-- > >-Pat > >bn207@freenet.carleton.ca And for the usual substantial fee,no doubt. Red suspenders are expensive these days. I understand the luxury car market in Toronto is tight these days. Especially for the Bay Street buckeroos. Ain't life good. Fuck grandma and her measly $8000/yr. Lord woncha buy me a Mercedes Benz ...... Bill
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<55b2hi$d5q@news.nstn.ca>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mailReferences:
<327844E5.5198@julian.uwo.ca> <55aoo3$nqn@freenet-news.carleton.ca>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fb374,5d4663d7e2379a13 X-Google-Attributes: gidfb374,public X-Google-Thread: 114977,5d4663d7e2379a13 X-Google-Attributes: gid114977,public From: nsnu@fox.nstn.ca (nsnu) Subject: Re: CPP:A Retro Plan Date: 1996/10/31 Message-ID: <55b2hi$d5q@news.nstn.ca> X-Deja-AN: 193487594 references: <327844E5.5198@julian.uwo.ca> <55aoo3$nqn@freenet-news.carleton.ca> organization: iSTAR Navigator User mime-version: 1.0 newsgroups: can.consumers,can.politics