More money for seniors?

[Hurtlander]

You're going to love the reasons behind this fiasco. According to the government, seniors 74 years of age and younger are more likely to be working part-time thereby not requiring the one-time payment or the scheduled 10% increase to the pension starting in 2022. According to the original blurb, the government said 34% of seniors 74 years of age were more than likely working part-time so didn't need the increase.

According to the government, seniors 75 years of age and older, if employed, earn roughly $750.00 annually so the "senior" 3.3M pensioners born on or before June 30th, 1947 need the one-time payment and increased pension to cover costs - heat, hydro, health care and so on. Out of luck if you were born on or after July 1st, 1947.

Instead of creating two separate classes of seniors, the government should have increased the pensions of all seniors by 5-7% without offering the additional one-time payment. And the BS about increased costs for seniors 75 years of age and older is just that - BS - don't tell me all seniors don't see the same increase in heat, housing, hydro, etc.

[Hurtlander]

^^^^ There’s a huge difference in bodies and ability to work part time in seniors between the ages of 65 and 74 that were office workers or white collar professionals vs seniors between 65 and 74 that were blue collar manual labourers all their lives. Most mechanics, millwrights, electricians, construction workers, loggers, mill workers, farmers, equipment operators etc that I know, including myself, are all suffering from arthritis, slipped disc’s, worn out knees, hips and shoulders by the time they’re in their early 60’s.. Sure we can work part time if we’re desperate enough, but the reality is it hurts like hell just getting out of bed in the morning.

[Hurtlander]

Instead of creating two separate classes of seniors, the government should have increased the pensions of all seniors by 5-7% without offering the additional one-time payment. And the BS about increased costs for seniors 75 years of age and older is just that - BS - don't tell me all seniors don't see the same increase in heat, housing, hydro, etc.

Exactly! Maybe they should just go by what Seniors income are.

Some have millions of dollars stashed away and some have nothing. The nothings should get an increase not everyone!

[just popping in]

Exactly! Maybe they should just go by what Seniors income are.

Some have millions of dollars stashed away and some have nothing. The nothings should get an increase not everyone!

👍👍

It doesn't make sense at all but hey.... nothing does nowadays.
Even the CERB, depended on who you applied through, Service Canada it wasn't taxable income, CRA it was taxable income. It doesn't matter, we work for pimps.

[oneh2obabe]

CERB was a taxable income whether an individual received it from CRA or Service Canada.

If you received Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB) from Service Canada or any Employment Insurance (EI) benefit payments, you should get a T4E tax slip with the amounts you received. These benefit amounts are taxable income. Any payments you received before December 31, 2020 will need to be reported on your 2020 tax return.

https://www.canada.ca/en/services/taxes ... eport.html

[Babba_not_Gump]

And whose brilliant idea was it that determined only seniors 75 and older are worthy of extra $500.00 bucks ? Are there no struggling 73 year olds ? Or 67 year olds ?

Some guy with pretty hair.

[nucksRnum1]

i believe this payment is put through another established release of benefits. Like the EI or CERB. If this particular payment is through the same conduit - then for the sake of ease - the payment would be taxed. Besides - why are seniors complaining? Its a freebie.

[Gerry Gray]

The Feds are doling out a $500 bonus to Seniors over 75 yrs old on Monday August 16 Since when are there two kinds of seniors. Why can they not give $250 to every senior like they did last year. This is not fair practice at all. In Canada you are a senior at 65 according to the government. More seniors over 75 are in care homes than those between 65 and 75. Therefore there is a smaller percentage need more than those under 75 still residing in their own homes where cost of rent, heat, taxes and mortgages are higher each year making it a real struggle for many to remain in their own homes. Seniors remaining in their own homes as opposed to care homes are a much smaller burden on governments. So now it seems there are old seniors, those over 75, and young seniors, those 65 to 75. What do you think?

[fluffy]

Isn't it a given that medical expenses increase with age ? And it costs a lot more to live in a care home than it does to living independently.

[oneh2obabe]

Being discussed here viewtopic.php?f=27&t=89344

TOPICS MERGED