Raise old age pension till 67

[waynetyea]

i voted for the torys last election and they never said anything about this... and its ok for them to have a gold plated pension paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for them after 2 terms? ya sure... next thing they will try and figure out how to make income tax different for different provinces.... if anything they should eliminate it for the guys who dont need it.. or make 50000 a year or more....dont take it form the poor jerks who have been paying into it for 45 years...who dont have any private pensions... it will be a cold day in hell before i vote for them again

[Captain Awesome]

... next thing they will try and figure out how to make income tax different for different provinces.

I hate to break it to you but...

Income taxes ARE different for different provinces already.

[kompili]

Making changes to the Canada Pension Plan would require the approval of two-thirds of the provinces. It is time to start taking action now to stop the government from raising the required age to collect. They are starting to talk about it, and for sure they will introduce a change in the near future. Sign every petition out there to stop them.

[Glacier]

I think 99% of Canadians agree that government pensions are more than ridiculous. However, pension reforms are necessary. The Americans and Europeans have already raised their retirement ages, and for good reason. People who continue to want their cake and eat it too should be reminded of the following quote:

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of
government. It can exist until the voters discover that
they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury.
From that moment on, the majority always votes for the
candidates promising them the most benefits from the public
treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses
over loose fiscal policy.

[kompili]

I think 99% of Canadians agree that government pensions are more than ridiculous. However, pension reforms are necessary. The Americans and Europeans have already raised their retirement ages, and for good reason. People who continue to want their cake and eat it too should be reminded of the following quote:

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of
government. It can exist until the voters discover that
they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury.
From that moment on, the majority always votes for the
candidates promising them the most benefits from the public
treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses
over loose fiscal policy.

Maybe this is a good place to start. I know this chart below is from the states, but I am sure Canada's and European countries chart looks pretty much the same. Only a fool will believe it is our fault that things like this have to be changed. There are many other places where money is being wasted that can be eliminated. Here is one little sample how our government waste money, and there is a thousand more if you want to do some research. People think it is our fault and the only way to fix it is by taking things away from the little man. Please get your heads out of the sand.

Canada’s infamous purchase (for C$750 million) of four “previously owned” British diesel submarines. None of the boats is even in the water right now; they’re being repaired, submerging Canadian taxpayers in an ocean of bills now totaling more than C$1 billion — and counting. One newly bought U-boat caught fire on the way to Canada in 2004.

[10Sne1]

Maybe this is a good place to start. I know this chart below is from the states, but I am sure Canada's and European countries chart looks pretty much the same. Only a fool will believe it is our fault that things like this have to be changed. There are many other places where money is being wasted that can be eliminated. Here is one little sample how our government waste money, and there is a thousand more if you want to do some research. People think it is our fault and the only way to fix it is by taking things away from the little man. Please get your heads out of the sand.

Canada’s infamous purchase (for C$750 million) of four “previously owned” British diesel submarines. None of the boats is even in the water right now; they’re being repaired, submerging Canadian taxpayers in an ocean of bills now totaling more than C$1 billion — and counting. One newly bought U-boat caught fire on the way to Canada in 2004.

HMCS Chicoutimi is a Victoria-class long-range hunter-killer (SSK) submarine of the Royal Canadian Navy, originally built and operated by the Royal Navy as HMS Upholder. Shortly after being handed over from the UK to Canada she was involved in a partial flooding incident which resulted in a fire at sea. The incident sparked a fierce debate over the value of the purchase of this group of second-hand vessels, as well as the handover inspection process. Despite all the media speculation, the accident was later proven to be the result of an error in operational procedure.[1]

[coffeeFreak]

Harper.jpg (19.53 KiB) Viewed 1045 times

[heymac]

Of course he didn't. Another unhappy supporter. The momentum is unstoppable.

i voted for the torys last election and they never said anything about this... and its ok for them to have a gold plated pension paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for them after 2 terms? ya sure... next thing they will try and figure out how to make income tax different for different provinces.... if anything they should eliminate it for the guys who dont need it.. or make 50000 a year or more....dont take it form the poor jerks who have been paying into it for 45 years...who dont have any private pensions... it will be a cold day in hell before i vote for them again

FYI.

1. What is the Old Age Security pension?

The Old Age Security pension is a monthly payment available to most Canadians aged 65 or older. You must apply to receive benefits. If you meet the eligibility requirements explained below, you may be entitled to receive the Old Age Security pension even if you are still working or have never worked.

2. Am I eligible?

We look at three factors to determine if you can receive the Old Age Security pension: your age, your legal status, and the number of years you have lived in Canada.

If one of the two scenarios listed below describes your situation, you may be eligible to receive the Old Age Security pension.

Scenario 1 - People living in Canada

You must be 65 years of age or older.
You must live in Canada and be a Canadian citizen or a legal resident at the time we approve your pension application.
You must have lived in Canada for at least 10 years after turning 18.
Scenario 2 - People living outside Canada

You must be 65 years of age or older.
You must have been a Canadian citizen or a legal resident of Canada the day before you left Canada.
You must have lived in Canada for at least 20 years after turning 18.
If you are not covered by either of these two scenarios, you may still qualify for a pension since Canada has social security agreements with many countries. If you have lived in one of these countries or contributed to its social security system, you may qualify for a pension from that country, from Canada or from both countries. For more information, contact us or see International Benefits.

[normaM]

rather than sitting on hold for hours does anyone know if the OAS is transferable to surviving spouse, like CPP? TIA

[kompili]

More waste of money, and they are worried about old age pensions. The list goes on and on and on.

1-G8/G20 costs: $1.24 billion
2-Space Agency/Agriculture Canada: $400,000 for failed “Canadian Content” astronaut food program.
3-Federal - Border Services Agency Employee: Bureaucrat spends five hours/day at work surfing porn and is not fired.
4-Federal - National Defence: $515,000 for not conducting security checks on NORAD facility builders.
5-Federal - Public Works: $550 million for maintenance including $1,000 for removing one light switch.
6-Federal - Senator Lavigne: $30,000 for expenses – while suspended from the Senate

[10Sne1]

Here's a link to the above post. So that everyone can read the article in it's entirety without somebody "cherry picking" only what they want you to see.

http://taxpayer.com/federal/13th-annual ... ds-winners

[heymac]

http://petition.web.net/caw/node/49

[Urbane]

First of all, there has been no announcement that the age for the OAS will be raised from 65 to 67 so the petition includes inaccurate information. I'm in favour of the OAS being looked at to make sure that those who really need it get it but that those who don't need it don't get it. Because what we will have is younger people providing money to some seniors who who have lots more money than those younger people do. And that's not fair.

The government has said that any changes that are made will be done in a way to give people time to plan. Likely those within ten years of retirement won't be affected at all but it does make sense to make sure that as a country we're living within our means. Just because we may see excesses in other areas (e.g. MP pensions which the PM has said will be dealt with) doesn't mean we shouldn't look at the OAS. By signing a petition for no adjustments in the future to the OAS you're also signing a petition asking young people to pay more in taxes so remember that. It's easy to sign a petition like this one but think carefully before you do so.

[heymac]

First of all, there has been no announcement that the age for the OAS will be raised from 65 to 67 so the petition includes inaccurate information. I'm in favour of the OAS being looked at to make sure that those who really need it get it but that those who don't need it don't get it. Because what we will have is younger people providing money to some seniors who who have lots more money than those younger people do. And that's not fair.

The government has said that any changes that are made will be done in a way to give people time to plan. Likely those within ten years of retirement won't be affected at all but it does make sense to make sure that as a country we're living within our means. Just because we may see excesses in other areas (e.g. MP pensions which the PM has said will be dealt with) doesn't mean we shouldn't look at the OAS. By signing a petition for no adjustments in the future to the OAS you're also signing a petition asking young people to pay more in taxes so remember that. It's easy to sign a petition like this one but think carefully before you do so.

I was hoping a link would be sufficient but already it's being deemed inaccurate. It does not say it will be raised.

Stephen Harper's announcement to raise the age for Old Age Security (OAS) from age 65 to 67 is a giant step backwards.

The Conservative government never announced such a proposal during the May election. It is indeed revealing that Harper goes to Davos, Switzerland to tell Canadians about his plans to change the eligibility age for the OAS.

Harper used the European economic crisis as his backdrop in hopes that Canadians will be lured into thinking that our retirement savings programs are somehow a danger to the economy.

Don't be fooled.

Recent reports for the OAS and the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) tell us that these public programs are secure well into the future. The OAS is funded through Canadian tax dollars and covers almost every Canadian resident. The program has been extremely effective in reducing poverty among seniors from a shameful high of 18% in 1980 to the current level of 5%.

Hiking up the age for OAS from 65 to 67 will have the greatest hardship on seniors with low incomes or unable to work due to poor health or disability.

Harper is using scare tactics saying that the number Canadian seniors will double by 2030. While this is true, what he does not say is that the economy will also grow over the next 20 years and as a percentage of GDP, the OAS cost to Canadians will only increase from 2.4% to 3.2%. A modest price to pay to ensure dignity for seniors.

The CPP is funded with employer and employee contributions and publicly administered by the federal government. The recent actuarial valuation for the CPP also reports that the plan is securely funded well into the future.

Harper's vision for Canadians is a grim one. His government stands by, (or sometimes even colludes) as corporations cut our wages and pensions. His government does nothing to stop the slide toward precarious jobs. After working a lifetime in poorly paid jobs without a decent employer pension plan, Canadians, in Harper's vision, can just keep on working.

What can you do?
Tell your federal Member of Parliament that you do not support the hiking up the age for OAS from 65 to 67. And you support the expansion of the CPP to provide a secure income for all Canadians.

About You:
(* indicates required information)
Last name: *

First name: *

Email: *

Phone number:

Address:

Address 2:

Province:

City/Town:

Postal Code: *

Privacy Policy: The contact information on this form or comments you make will be private and confidential and will not be passed on to any individual or organization other than representatives of this campaign. If you wish to give further support, please check the boxes below.
I give permission for this campaign to contact me on this issue.
I give permission for this campaign to disclose my comments on this issue to Canadian Members of Parliament.
The Message:
Dear Member of Parliament,

I was dismayed to hear comments by Prime Minister Stephen Harper in Davos, Switzerland, suggesting that key elements of our retirement system could be under attack.

Later, once back in Canada, these comments were echoed by other cabinet ministers and the Prime Minister himself when he suggested the government could raise the age to receive Old Age Security (OAS) benefits from 65 to 67.

The OAS is meant to help seniors by supplementing the far too modest income provided by the Canada Pension Plan. The Prime Minister and the Conservative government are intentionally using the backdrop of the European economic crisis to breed fear into Canadians about the economy and the sustainability of our retirement security programs.

It is worth noting that over the years, the OAS program has been extremely effective in reducing poverty among seniors from a shameful high of 18 per cent in 1980 to the current level of five per cent.

At a time when a large segment of the population will be nearing retirement age, making drastic and unnecessary changes to our retirement system is reckless and ill-advised.

This change will not only impact seniors, who will be forced to work years longer, but also our country’s youth who now see few decent employment opportunities. This will only worsen as people delay retirement because of financial hardship. Assurances by the government that raising the age for OAS would have no impact on current retirees are misleading - this change would impact everyone – and immediately.

I urge you to reject the government’s plan to raise the age of eligibility for the OAS benefit as well as the idea of the Registered Pooled Pension Plan and instead support a gradual doubling of the CPP and QPP, which are sensible and affordable retirement security programs.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,


This message will be emailed to:
Stephen Harper -Prime Minister of Canada
Jim Flaherty -Federal Finance Minister

[Glacier]

Stephen Harper's announcement to raise the age for Old Age Security (OAS) from age 65 to 67 is a giant step backwards.

Please cite your source. When did Stephen Harper announce raising the age for OAS from 65 to 67?