🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: can.consumers
Article #2205

Re: CPP:A Retro Plan

#2205
From: nsnu
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 00:00
54 lines
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$d5q@news.nstn.ca>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mail
References: <327844E5.5198@julian.uwo.ca> <55aoo3$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