Increase Canada Pension Plan contributions?

[NAB]

Yes, and the potential ramifications from that would be horrendous.

Nab

[Captain Awesome]

Except most won't do it!

That's why I'm saying - have it as an option. May be you have to qualify for it somehow - say if you don't invest this year into RRSP/TFSA, they yank the money from your taxes next year or something.

[Gone_Fishin]

Misinformation:

And the cpp portion that I will receive is deducted from my company pension plan at 65.

The truth comes out. A bridge is not a pension:

35+ years service gets me roughly $1500 a month pension. A bridge of roughly $1000 a month is also what I get but that stops once I start collecting cpp at 65.

People may wonder why others say they have no credibility. This is why.

[Gone_Fishin]

...and that's taxable income to boot unlike OAS. And of course, at such retirement income levels "pension income supplement" to OAS (GIS?) has no bearing at all. The question still remains, should Canada Pension Plan contributions be increased, in the case of one analysis and related proposal this week as much as doubled! 60% of workers have no private contributory retirement plans and will be totally dependent on their accumulated CPP contributions to generate even a marginally livable retirement income.

Nab

No. Look after yourself or suffer the consequences.

[NAB]

A bridge is not a pension:

It would appear to be part of his/her pension PLAN as stated though.

Nab

[Gone_Fishin]

No, bridges are NOT part of a pension PLAN. Bridges are special offerings by the employer to pay a reduced SALARY to employees to encourage accelerated attrition of older workers.

[NAB]

Canada Federal Public Service definition..

"When you retire, you will receive both a lifetime pension and a bridge benefit. A bridge benefit is a temporary benefit, payable until age 65 (the bridge benefit stops if you become entitled to CPP/QPP disability benefits). Regardless of when you start your CPP/QPP pension, your bridge benefit payments will stop at age 65."

[Gone_Fishin]

There ya go. A bridge BENEFIT. It's NOT part of the pension PLAN.

[flamingfingers]

Canada Federal Public Service definition..

"When you retire, you will receive both a lifetime pension and a bridge benefit. A bridge benefit is a temporary benefit, payable until age 65 (the bridge benefit stops if you become entitled to CPP/QPP disability benefits). Regardless of when you start your CPP/QPP pension, your bridge benefit payments will stop at age 65."

The bridge benefit is paid for out of the pension plan, not by the employer.

[NAB]

Exactly. Here's OMER's explanation..

OMERS (Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System) was established in 1962 as the pension plan for employees of municipal governments, school boards, libraries, police and fire departments, Children's Aid Societies and other local agencies throughout Ontario.

What is the OMERS Bridge Benefit?
The bridge benefit is approximately the amount of pension you will receive from CPP.
If you retire before age 65, you receive the OMERS bridge benefit as part of your total pension benefit. The bridge benefit essentially "tops up" your early retirement pension until age 65.

[steven lloyd]

The bridge benefit is paid for out of the pension plan, not by the employer.

Yes, this stuff isn't really that terribly complicated (reduced salary to someone already retired ? - LOLOL)
Poor dude - if it wasnt for bad luck he'd have no luck at all.

[rvrepairnut]

the so called bridge benefit is most certainly part of the pension plan.Its paid out of the pension fund plan that your enrolled in.its set up this way when U retire if u so choose this particular option as my wife did when she worked for the BC gov.
she could have taken less money when she first retired and when she reached age 65 her pention would have stayed the same even though she would receive CPP and OAS on top of her pention

[steven lloyd]

The question still remains, should Canada Pension Plan contributions be increased, in the case of one analysis and related proposal this week as much as doubled! 60% of workers have no private contributory retirement plans and will be totally dependent on their accumulated CPP contributions to generate even a marginally livable retirement income.

I think the answer to that question is “yes”. While some of us have been “paying ourselves first” and putting money into savings and investments before spending it anywhere else, the statistics show the vast majority of Canadians haven’t been. Whether the reason is lack of knowledge or discipline or perceived inability due to low income (although even ten percent of a little can ultimately grow into a lot), the fact is many Canadians (apparently the majority) are not preparing themselves. A short-sighted and simplistic response might be to say “Look after yourself or suffer the consequences”, but the reality is we will all be paying the consequences through increased taxes for increased health costs (associated with elder poverty), subsidized housing, etc. Better we implement some form of forced savings. Even those of us who have our own investment plans will not lose out, and we will all benefit from reduced stress and demand on our health and social safety nets.

[Donald G]

The story of "The Wealthy Barber" is what is often the difference between a comfortable retirement and a pretty skimpy retirement. The Wealthy Barber paid his pension fund and invested 10% of every dollar he earned during his working life and lived to enjoy it after retirement.

He insisted that, regardless of his bills, he pay himself first and sort the rest out with his remaining money.

[NAB]

""Canadian pensions are at risk due to low interest rates.

So finds a new study that was recently released by the Global Risk Institute in Financial Services. It adds the economy, Canadian businesses and our job market will all have to expand over the next few years for the pension system to remain viable.

Otherwise, that system must be reformed. For example, private schemes will have to ask for greater contributions from their members and sponsors.

Read: Are occupational pensions too high?

Dr. Michel Maila, president at Global Risk Institute, says, “Recent debates about the current low levels of interest rates in developed economies are really just the tip of the iceberg…Beneath these low rates is ongoing anaemic growth, low investment and weak employment.”"

http://www.advisor.ca/retirement/low-ra ... ons-136796