http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health/new-health/health-news/when-doctors-make-bad-calls/article2349755/
( D - any health care system that addresses mistakes by doctors, and corrects them, reaps huge financial dividents. Besides the human cost. )
How could this misdiagnosis have happened – and, what's more, persisted even as counter-evidence piled up? It not as unusual as patients – and doctors – would hope: Statistics show that 10 to 15 per cent of patients are misdiagnosed; the number is likely higher, since many medical errors are never discovered...
But that means roughly 80 per cent of mistakes are physician error...
A Canadian study in 2004 estimated that 9,000 to 23,000 Canadian patients die yearly after a preventable “adverse event,” such as surgical errors and improperly prescribed medications.
An Ontario study published last year, which looked at 22 million patients visits from 2003 to 2007, found that the longer patients waited in a crowded emergency room – only to be discharged and sent home – the more likely they were to die or be admitted to hospital within seven days. That's disconcerting when we know that more Canadians, unable to find family doctors, are using the ER as an alternative. The problem may get only worse.
Canadian physicians are among the best trained in the world; their error rates are on par with other industrialized countries.
-------------
( D - I remain bewildered by the cause of our doctor shortage. It was engineered by gov't. )
http://www.ispub.com/journal/the-internet-journal-of-healthcare-administration/volume-6-number-1/addressing-the-physician-shortage-with-international-medical-graduates-the-current-situation-and-solutions.html
It has been stated that the ratio of physicians to population should not decrease below 1.9/1000 (Tyrrell & Dauphinee, 1999) 5 . In 1999 the ratio was 1.85/1000, and it will decrease to 1.4/1000 by 2021 based on the current physician supply (Scully & Tyrrell, 1999) 1 . Not only does this adversely affect patients, but doctors themselves are feeling the pressure...
Making matters worse, an increase in physicians' average age, the growing number of female physicians, and the reduced workloads of younger physicians are all contributing to the need for more physicians (OHRC, 2007) 3 . Increasing age of physicians is marked by higher retirement rates, and fewer hours of work per week. More doctors are needed to replace the retiring doctors, and to make up the slack from older doctor's reduced work weeks...
The supply deficit is largely blamed on a 10% first year enrollment reduction from 1993-94. The reduction was based on a 1991 recommendation to stabilize physician supply. Since it takes at least 6 years to train a physician after entry into medical school, the full effects of the reduction were not felt until recent years (Stoddart, 1999) 8 . Furthermore, first year medical school opportunities in Canada (7.1/100,000) are nearly half of that available in Great Britain (12.9/100,000), and are far worse than that of the US and Australia (Scully & Tyrrell, 1999).
------------
D - a few years ago, I was doing food sanitation in a food factory in town. Trying to use a too-small wrench to twist a too-large nut at waist height, I ended up smashing myself in the mouth with the wrench. I cut through both sides of skin and membrane, and very nearly knocked out my front teeth. It was late evening. Of course, all I needed was a few stitches within a few hours for the skin to seal and heal well. It was after all, a vanity scar. But there were no all-night non-emergency clinics open. So I ended up hogging emerg like everybody else.
I'm not sure how the system can be quite as dysfunctional as it is.
A few years back, after living in town for 15 years now, I finally got a family doctor. Karmali. I was thrilled... at first.
Instead, my appointment time did not matter, I sat in what amounted to small crowded and busy clinic setting, and my treatment was inferior to a clinic. I was glad when she retired and I could go back to a clinic.
Just tragic.
Sunday, February 26, 2012
OMER pension status sign of things to come for CPP
http://www.omers.com/corporate/news_article.aspx?newsid=5088
Funding Deficit
The Plan's 2011 funding deficit was $7.3 billion versus $4.5 billion a year earlier.
“Like that of many other pension plans, OMERS funding deficit position primarily reflects the continuing impact of the 2008 global economic downturn and increasing actuarial liabilities due to plan demographic shifts,” said Patrick Crowley, OMERS Chief Financial Officer.
Based on our expected investment returns combined with temporary contribution increases and benefit reductions, we expect the Plan will return to surplus within 10 to 15 years.
------------
That is some tough love. It'll take a DECADE to recover - even combined with both increased payins and decreased payouts!
I expect this to be the conclusion of the CPP triennial review.
Everybody in charge is still playing dumb. Maybe they are not playing?
----------------------
http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/eng/oas-cpp/reports/2010/page06.shtml
As joint stewards of the CPP, the federal and provincial ministers of finance review the CPP’s financial state every three years and make recommendations as to whether benefits and/or contribution rates should be changed. They base their recommendations on a number of factors, including the results of an examination of the CPP by the Chief Actuary. The Chief Actuary is required under the legislation to produce an actuarial report on the CPP every three years (in the first year of the legislated ministerial triennial review of the Plan). The CPP legislation also requires that the Chief Actuary prepare an actuarial report any time a Bill is introduced in Parliament that has, in the view of the Chief Actuary, a material impact on the estimates in the most recent triennial actuarial report. This reporting ensures that the long-term financial implications of proposed Plan changes are given timely consideration.
Changes to the CPP legislation governing the general level of benefits, the rate of contributions or the investment policy framework can be made only through an Act of Parliament. Any such changes also require the agreement of at least two-thirds of the provinces, representing at least two-thirds of the population of all those provinces. The changes come into force only after two years’ notice, unless all of the provinces waive this requirement, and only after provincial orders in council confirm the changes have been passed.
------------------
http://www.omers.com/investments/news_article.aspx?newsid=3343
Actuarial assumptions indicate OMERS requires an investment return of 6.5% annually to keep assets and liabilities in balance. That rate of return, combined with temporary contribution increases and benefit reductions, will see the Plan return to surplus in 2025. "Based on our asset mix policy and active investment strategy, we believe we can generate average returns of 7% to 11% annually over the next five years. Doing so would return the Plan to surplus between 2015 and 2020 - five to 10 years ahead of schedule," said Patrick Crowley, OMERS Chief Financial Officer.
------------------
D - such CPP 'tough love' is yet to come. And will be some time. The Boomers need to time it right to offload as much of the pain onto GenXYZ as they can, while hogging all the gain for themselves.
Funding Deficit
The Plan's 2011 funding deficit was $7.3 billion versus $4.5 billion a year earlier.
“Like that of many other pension plans, OMERS funding deficit position primarily reflects the continuing impact of the 2008 global economic downturn and increasing actuarial liabilities due to plan demographic shifts,” said Patrick Crowley, OMERS Chief Financial Officer.
Based on our expected investment returns combined with temporary contribution increases and benefit reductions, we expect the Plan will return to surplus within 10 to 15 years.
------------
That is some tough love. It'll take a DECADE to recover - even combined with both increased payins and decreased payouts!
I expect this to be the conclusion of the CPP triennial review.
Everybody in charge is still playing dumb. Maybe they are not playing?
----------------------
http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/eng/oas-cpp/reports/2010/page06.shtml
As joint stewards of the CPP, the federal and provincial ministers of finance review the CPP’s financial state every three years and make recommendations as to whether benefits and/or contribution rates should be changed. They base their recommendations on a number of factors, including the results of an examination of the CPP by the Chief Actuary. The Chief Actuary is required under the legislation to produce an actuarial report on the CPP every three years (in the first year of the legislated ministerial triennial review of the Plan). The CPP legislation also requires that the Chief Actuary prepare an actuarial report any time a Bill is introduced in Parliament that has, in the view of the Chief Actuary, a material impact on the estimates in the most recent triennial actuarial report. This reporting ensures that the long-term financial implications of proposed Plan changes are given timely consideration.
Changes to the CPP legislation governing the general level of benefits, the rate of contributions or the investment policy framework can be made only through an Act of Parliament. Any such changes also require the agreement of at least two-thirds of the provinces, representing at least two-thirds of the population of all those provinces. The changes come into force only after two years’ notice, unless all of the provinces waive this requirement, and only after provincial orders in council confirm the changes have been passed.
------------------
http://www.omers.com/investments/news_article.aspx?newsid=3343
Actuarial assumptions indicate OMERS requires an investment return of 6.5% annually to keep assets and liabilities in balance. That rate of return, combined with temporary contribution increases and benefit reductions, will see the Plan return to surplus in 2025. "Based on our asset mix policy and active investment strategy, we believe we can generate average returns of 7% to 11% annually over the next five years. Doing so would return the Plan to surplus between 2015 and 2020 - five to 10 years ahead of schedule," said Patrick Crowley, OMERS Chief Financial Officer.
------------------
D - such CPP 'tough love' is yet to come. And will be some time. The Boomers need to time it right to offload as much of the pain onto GenXYZ as they can, while hogging all the gain for themselves.
Friday, February 24, 2012
how retirement GIS works
(Image: poverty, working age and retired compared.)
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/economy/economy-lab/the-economists/lets-inject-some-creativity-into-retirement-policies/article2347543/
The GIS rules are complex, and you would have to sift through the legislation and regulations to figure out how it actually works. Currently, a single individual can receive a maximum benefit of $732 per month when over age 65. Regular benefits are reduced by 50 cents for every dollar of income from some sources – including RRSPs, pensions, employment earnings over $3,500, and CPP. Benefits are not reduced for income from other sources – OAS, TFSAs or your first $3,500 in wages. Realized gains on investments count against GIS, while unrealized gains (such as those on housing assets) do not.
Individuals age 60-64 are eligible for benefits if their spouse is over 65 or they are widowed. Single individuals age 60-64 are not eligible, nor are widows who get married to someone under 65...
On the plus side, the GIS and other public pension expansions have been credited with the dramatic reductions in elderly poverty since the 1970s. While more than 30 per cent of seniors had income less than Statistics Canada’s Low Income Cut-off in 1977, only 5 per cent were this poor in 2008 (see here for some details).
Can we find a way to improve on senior poverty, reduce the complexity of this system, minimize the distortion to savings and work decisions, and still save some tax dollars? Here’s some ideas that we could debate (and should probably be considered as a package)...
Currently, a single senior over 65 with no other retirement income could receive up to $15,269 annually from OAS and GIS combined. Opinions will differ, but most Canadians would not consider that outrageous.
Create a progressive GIS clawback system, potentially improving the work and lifetime savings options for the poorest seniors who are able. For example, we could apply a 0 per cent clawback on the first $2,000 of income, 25 per cent on the next $2,000, 50 per cent on the next $2,000, and 75 per cent on any income above $6,000. I’m sure a better scheme could be derived, but this one would result in senior individuals having roughly $25,000 (including OAS) before being completely cut off from GIS.
-------
http://www.tammyschirle.org/research/senior_poverty.html
D - good stuff, Professor Schirle!!!
Thursday, February 23, 2012
pension anxiety
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-aims-oas-reform-message-at-the-young/article2344842/
Respondents still ranked job creation as their No. 1 concern. However, only 32 per cent gave that answer, compared to 38 per cent in 2010. Tax relief is now the priority of 22 per cent of Canadians surveyed – up from 16 per cent – and strengthening pensions has become the top concern of 18 per cent of respondents – up from 13 per cent.
In 2010, only 13.9 per cent of Canadians surveyed aged 50-59 listed strengthening pensions as their No. 1 priority. Now 25.8 per cent of that age group lists it at No. 1, and a further 20.1 per cent list it as their second priority...
Most Canadians qualify for OAS, and the average monthly payment is $508.35.
----------------
D - Harper has ensured Boomers won't face cuts.
That GenXYZ will pay less in only because GenXYZ will get less out.
But we'll still be footing the bill for Boomers.
I worry the Boomer reaction - via CARP - will be to double up their efforts for a last-minute smash 'n grab on pension payouts.
Be warned. Be prepared...
Respondents still ranked job creation as their No. 1 concern. However, only 32 per cent gave that answer, compared to 38 per cent in 2010. Tax relief is now the priority of 22 per cent of Canadians surveyed – up from 16 per cent – and strengthening pensions has become the top concern of 18 per cent of respondents – up from 13 per cent.
In 2010, only 13.9 per cent of Canadians surveyed aged 50-59 listed strengthening pensions as their No. 1 priority. Now 25.8 per cent of that age group lists it at No. 1, and a further 20.1 per cent list it as their second priority...
Most Canadians qualify for OAS, and the average monthly payment is $508.35.
----------------
D - Harper has ensured Boomers won't face cuts.
That GenXYZ will pay less in only because GenXYZ will get less out.
But we'll still be footing the bill for Boomers.
I worry the Boomer reaction - via CARP - will be to double up their efforts for a last-minute smash 'n grab on pension payouts.
Be warned. Be prepared...
CBC show on sexualizing teenagers
http://www.cbc.ca/thecurrent/episode/2012/02/23/sext-up-kids---how-children-are-becoming-hyper-sexualized/
Sext Up Kids - How children are becoming hyper-sexualized
We started this segment with a scene from a new documentary called Sext Up Kids, that airs on CBC Television's Doc Zone tonight.
From push up bras for pre-teens to hard core porn on cell phones, the film looks at what effect this is all having on young people-- really young people. We're going to talk about the film this morning, and a warning, some of its subject matter is very explicit -- even for adults
-------------
D - sexting with pics runs afoul of pornography laws in a hurry.
It was not this complicated when I was growing up. I bought a huge VHS-based camcorder in high school. That makes a foolish impulse like pic-sexting far too difficult to engage in without thought.
I suppose that girl who plays Hannah Montana, Miley Cyrus, once she slipped off the leash of her handlers, is the highest-profile 'fail' in this respect to date.
I was horrified to hear that some clothing companies make thongs for kids. That is just plan wrong!
Sext Up Kids - How children are becoming hyper-sexualized
We started this segment with a scene from a new documentary called Sext Up Kids, that airs on CBC Television's Doc Zone tonight.
From push up bras for pre-teens to hard core porn on cell phones, the film looks at what effect this is all having on young people-- really young people. We're going to talk about the film this morning, and a warning, some of its subject matter is very explicit -- even for adults
-------------
D - sexting with pics runs afoul of pornography laws in a hurry.
It was not this complicated when I was growing up. I bought a huge VHS-based camcorder in high school. That makes a foolish impulse like pic-sexting far too difficult to engage in without thought.
I suppose that girl who plays Hannah Montana, Miley Cyrus, once she slipped off the leash of her handlers, is the highest-profile 'fail' in this respect to date.
I was horrified to hear that some clothing companies make thongs for kids. That is just plan wrong!
sweden suggest retire at 75
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/international-news/european/pm-says-swedes-need-to-work-until-theyre-75/article2344155/
In comments that caused uproar among the country’s powerful unions, he envisioned a society in which people work to the age of 75, making at least one career change along the way.
The push for later retirements in Sweden, where people already work longer than anywhere else in the European Union, underscores a growing problem that threatens to paralyze the euro zone. Even as debt-strapped nations make deep and painful cuts in public spending, they are bracing for the parallel threat posed by a rapidly aging work force...
To prevent a crippling burden on public welfare systems, policy makers are pushing for a variety of reforms designed to keep older workers on the job longer. In most cases, this has meant increases in official retirement ages: from 60 to 62 in France, for instance, and from 65 to 67 in Spain.
Compared to these reforms, Mr. Reinfeldt’s pitch for retirement at 75 seems “excessive,” said Asghar Zaidi, of the European Centre for Social Welfare Policy and Research in Vienna...
Getting Swedes to think beyond 65 hasn’t been easy, despite a dramatic overhaul of the country’s public pension system that created incentives for working later in life.
In the late 1980s, demographic projections made it clear that without changes, the country’s traditional defined benefit pension would be bankrupt in about 20 years.
(D - the next part I LIKE - raising awareness of the issue!)
A flexible retirement age allows Swedes to begin collecting their pensions at 61, but the longer they work, the more they receive in benefits. To that end, each year, an orange envelope arrives in the mail containing projections (based on estimated life span) for how much individuals are entitled to if they choose to retire at 61, 65 or 67.
The idea is to educate workers on the limitations of the system as well as encourage them to delay retirement, said Mats Persson, a professor at Stockholm University’s Institute for International Economic Studies.
“Since we got the new system, I think Swedes have a much more realistic view of pensions,” he said.
In comments that caused uproar among the country’s powerful unions, he envisioned a society in which people work to the age of 75, making at least one career change along the way.
The push for later retirements in Sweden, where people already work longer than anywhere else in the European Union, underscores a growing problem that threatens to paralyze the euro zone. Even as debt-strapped nations make deep and painful cuts in public spending, they are bracing for the parallel threat posed by a rapidly aging work force...
To prevent a crippling burden on public welfare systems, policy makers are pushing for a variety of reforms designed to keep older workers on the job longer. In most cases, this has meant increases in official retirement ages: from 60 to 62 in France, for instance, and from 65 to 67 in Spain.
Compared to these reforms, Mr. Reinfeldt’s pitch for retirement at 75 seems “excessive,” said Asghar Zaidi, of the European Centre for Social Welfare Policy and Research in Vienna...
Getting Swedes to think beyond 65 hasn’t been easy, despite a dramatic overhaul of the country’s public pension system that created incentives for working later in life.
In the late 1980s, demographic projections made it clear that without changes, the country’s traditional defined benefit pension would be bankrupt in about 20 years.
(D - the next part I LIKE - raising awareness of the issue!)
A flexible retirement age allows Swedes to begin collecting their pensions at 61, but the longer they work, the more they receive in benefits. To that end, each year, an orange envelope arrives in the mail containing projections (based on estimated life span) for how much individuals are entitled to if they choose to retire at 61, 65 or 67.
The idea is to educate workers on the limitations of the system as well as encourage them to delay retirement, said Mats Persson, a professor at Stockholm University’s Institute for International Economic Studies.
“Since we got the new system, I think Swedes have a much more realistic view of pensions,” he said.
GM private sector pension got public bailout
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/gm-still-facing-huge-pension-shortfall/article2345677/
General Motors of Canada Ltd. still faces a massive shortfall in its unionized pension plan despite a $3.2-billion contribution taxpayers made to the fund when the auto maker’s parent company went into bankruptcy protection in 2009.
The shortfall stood at $2.2-billion as of Sept. 1, 2010 (the latest data available), which is a vast improvement on the $5.1-billion deficiency in the plan before the special payment was made. But it is still a significant amount for a plan that covers more than 30,000 retirees.
The GM Canada plan stands out in part because it was the looming crisis of the $5.1-billion shortfall that company executives pointed to in 2008 when they sought a bailout from the federal and Ontario governments.
----------
D - the article ignores the special sweetheart deal a few huge companies got, in terms of having lowered demands for setting aside savings for pension plans.
This was joint corporate- gov't boondoggle. Now taxpayers are footing a multi BILLION dollar bill. Go team.
Aside -The Swedish leader just suggested a retirement age of -wait for it - 75!
General Motors of Canada Ltd. still faces a massive shortfall in its unionized pension plan despite a $3.2-billion contribution taxpayers made to the fund when the auto maker’s parent company went into bankruptcy protection in 2009.
The shortfall stood at $2.2-billion as of Sept. 1, 2010 (the latest data available), which is a vast improvement on the $5.1-billion deficiency in the plan before the special payment was made. But it is still a significant amount for a plan that covers more than 30,000 retirees.
The GM Canada plan stands out in part because it was the looming crisis of the $5.1-billion shortfall that company executives pointed to in 2008 when they sought a bailout from the federal and Ontario governments.
----------
D - the article ignores the special sweetheart deal a few huge companies got, in terms of having lowered demands for setting aside savings for pension plans.
This was joint corporate- gov't boondoggle. Now taxpayers are footing a multi BILLION dollar bill. Go team.
Aside -The Swedish leader just suggested a retirement age of -wait for it - 75!
Monday, February 20, 2012
how to withdraw $ from your RESP
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/personal-finance/household-finances/a-primer-on-how-to-withdraw-from-resps/article2145056/
1. Don’t wait until the last minute
2. Withdrawals can be made before your child starts classes
3. You don’t have to justify RESP withdrawals or show receipts
4. Specify if the withdrawal is to be from contributions, non-contributions or both
5. Watch the taxes
6. The child can still receive grants, even while doing withdrawals
7. Don’t withdraw more than $7,200 of grant money per beneficiary
8. Don’t leave non-contribution money in the account
1. Don’t wait until the last minute
2. Withdrawals can be made before your child starts classes
3. You don’t have to justify RESP withdrawals or show receipts
4. Specify if the withdrawal is to be from contributions, non-contributions or both
5. Watch the taxes
6. The child can still receive grants, even while doing withdrawals
7. Don’t withdraw more than $7,200 of grant money per beneficiary
8. Don’t leave non-contribution money in the account
Saturday, February 18, 2012
post #100! all should pay school taxes. why.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/02/120217145743.htm
D - seniors arguing they should not pay for public education is about as selfish as working age citizens arguing they should not contribute to senior access.
While many communities offer various school-tax exemptions, those who don't have children in school routinely oppose paying any school taxes, Neal said. In Michigan, nearly half of the 505 school bond elections between 2000 and 2005 failed, according to a March 2010 study in the journal Educational Policy...
The researchers found a strong relationship between those who were satisfied with their communities and quality schools. This finding was not affected by gender, age, race, employment status or whether the participant owned or rented a home or had children in school.
"We found that having quality public schools makes people more satisfied with their community regardless of whether they had kids in the schools or not," Neal said.
Neal said this is likely due to two major reasons:
Public schools offer amenities to the entire community such as adult education courses, after-hours computer labs, workout facilities, auditorium space for churches and other groups, and more.
Public schools have the more indirect benefit of promoting relationships among neighborhood residents. These relationships lead to issues getting solved -- such as broken streetlights, unplowed streets or crime problems -- that benefit everyone.
-------
D - finally figuring out the revised Google blog interface.
- 'paste as plain text' avoids format issues
- submit images in the reverse order you desire to see them listed
- still no LJ-style way to embed images within the text
- not sure how to write a blog title that fits on 1 line.
There are many sad oversights in the blog design.
The kingdom was lost for lack of a nail.
D - seniors arguing they should not pay for public education is about as selfish as working age citizens arguing they should not contribute to senior access.
While many communities offer various school-tax exemptions, those who don't have children in school routinely oppose paying any school taxes, Neal said. In Michigan, nearly half of the 505 school bond elections between 2000 and 2005 failed, according to a March 2010 study in the journal Educational Policy...
The researchers found a strong relationship between those who were satisfied with their communities and quality schools. This finding was not affected by gender, age, race, employment status or whether the participant owned or rented a home or had children in school.
"We found that having quality public schools makes people more satisfied with their community regardless of whether they had kids in the schools or not," Neal said.
Neal said this is likely due to two major reasons:
Public schools offer amenities to the entire community such as adult education courses, after-hours computer labs, workout facilities, auditorium space for churches and other groups, and more.
Public schools have the more indirect benefit of promoting relationships among neighborhood residents. These relationships lead to issues getting solved -- such as broken streetlights, unplowed streets or crime problems -- that benefit everyone.
-------
D - finally figuring out the revised Google blog interface.
- 'paste as plain text' avoids format issues
- submit images in the reverse order you desire to see them listed
- still no LJ-style way to embed images within the text
- not sure how to write a blog title that fits on 1 line.
There are many sad oversights in the blog design.
The kingdom was lost for lack of a nail.
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
CPI partial de-indexing. call an ace an ace
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/economy/economy-lab/daily-mix/canadians-should-demand-a-debate-on-cpi-changes/article2337605/
The Globe and Mail has revealed that Statistics Canada has been quietly planning changes to the way it calculates its Consumer Price Index measure of inflation: something I warned about a year ago.
The technical details of these changes may only seem of interest to the pocket protector and calculator crowd, but the reality is they will affect all Canadians: from pensioners and hardhats to those wearing pinstripes.
------------------
D - and he WARNED us. Poor Cassandra... poor us. (MARCH 2011)
http://cupe.ca/updir/ECB_March_2011.pdf
Redefining inflation: who wins and who loses?
Canada’s inflation target is up for renewal and revision at
the end of this year. For the first time in twenty years, the federal
government could reduce the 2% inflation target down to 1%,
change the type of price target it uses, or even redefine how it
measures inflation. This would have major impacts on workers’
wages, social transfers, pensions and taxes. The changes may
not seem much on an annual basis, but they really add up over
time for people—and could provide billions in annual savings for
governments and employers.
----------------
The consumer price index is the single most important economic measure Statistics Canada produces. Hundreds of billions of dollars of pension payments, tax deductions, payments and credits are explicitly indexed to it in legislation and most workers wages are implicitly linked to it. Changes of a fraction of a per cent in the measurement of CPI could mean billions of dollars in annual savings for governments on one hand and lower incomes for pensioners, workers and taxpayers on the other.
The Bank of Canada estimated the CPI overstates inflation by 0.6 per cent a year because changes in the index don’t adjust as fast as consumers do to lower prices for goods or for improvements in ...
-------------
D - significance?
-------------
The impact may be relatively small initially, but it cumulates rapidly. For instance, a 0.6 percentage point reduction in Old Age Security payments would save the federal government $210-million in the first year, but almost $3-billion annually in ten years. Increased revenues from a 0.6 per cent lower increase in the basic personal amount for taxes would increase the federal government’s revenues by $180-million in the first year, but more than $2.5-billion annually in ten years. These are just two of the dozens of federal tax thresholds, deductions and credits that would be affected.
-------------------
D - meaning the impact increases rapidly as time goes on. In other words, while it just clips the Boomers, it hammers GenX.
D - maybe you are saying "rain falls on the good and bad alike", but look closer. We could have left the basic OAS payment with the existing inflation index- that would ensure no more poor seniors slip into poverty. We even could have de-indexed the clawback, a wonderfully PROGRESSIVE measure, while limiting spending increases. This would even have exempted the middle class, making it politically expedient and practically expedient.
Harper did no such thing. He did NOTHING to reduce overall senior poverty. He did NOTHING to remove lower-upper-class seniors from the OAS feeding trough. His policy is totally income-neutral. It most certainly is not PROGRESSIVE.
Well, there it is.
Gonna quote some song lyrics here. The Ramones.
Well, I just want to walk right out of this world,
'Cause everybody has a poison heart
I just want to walk right out of this world,
'Cause everybody has a poison heart.
The Globe and Mail has revealed that Statistics Canada has been quietly planning changes to the way it calculates its Consumer Price Index measure of inflation: something I warned about a year ago.
The technical details of these changes may only seem of interest to the pocket protector and calculator crowd, but the reality is they will affect all Canadians: from pensioners and hardhats to those wearing pinstripes.
------------------
D - and he WARNED us. Poor Cassandra... poor us. (MARCH 2011)
http://cupe.ca/updir/ECB_March_2011.pdf
Redefining inflation: who wins and who loses?
Canada’s inflation target is up for renewal and revision at
the end of this year. For the first time in twenty years, the federal
government could reduce the 2% inflation target down to 1%,
change the type of price target it uses, or even redefine how it
measures inflation. This would have major impacts on workers’
wages, social transfers, pensions and taxes. The changes may
not seem much on an annual basis, but they really add up over
time for people—and could provide billions in annual savings for
governments and employers.
----------------
The consumer price index is the single most important economic measure Statistics Canada produces. Hundreds of billions of dollars of pension payments, tax deductions, payments and credits are explicitly indexed to it in legislation and most workers wages are implicitly linked to it. Changes of a fraction of a per cent in the measurement of CPI could mean billions of dollars in annual savings for governments on one hand and lower incomes for pensioners, workers and taxpayers on the other.
The Bank of Canada estimated the CPI overstates inflation by 0.6 per cent a year because changes in the index don’t adjust as fast as consumers do to lower prices for goods or for improvements in ...
-------------
D - significance?
-------------
The impact may be relatively small initially, but it cumulates rapidly. For instance, a 0.6 percentage point reduction in Old Age Security payments would save the federal government $210-million in the first year, but almost $3-billion annually in ten years. Increased revenues from a 0.6 per cent lower increase in the basic personal amount for taxes would increase the federal government’s revenues by $180-million in the first year, but more than $2.5-billion annually in ten years. These are just two of the dozens of federal tax thresholds, deductions and credits that would be affected.
-------------------
D - meaning the impact increases rapidly as time goes on. In other words, while it just clips the Boomers, it hammers GenX.
D - maybe you are saying "rain falls on the good and bad alike", but look closer. We could have left the basic OAS payment with the existing inflation index- that would ensure no more poor seniors slip into poverty. We even could have de-indexed the clawback, a wonderfully PROGRESSIVE measure, while limiting spending increases. This would even have exempted the middle class, making it politically expedient and practically expedient.
Harper did no such thing. He did NOTHING to reduce overall senior poverty. He did NOTHING to remove lower-upper-class seniors from the OAS feeding trough. His policy is totally income-neutral. It most certainly is not PROGRESSIVE.
Well, there it is.
Gonna quote some song lyrics here. The Ramones.
Well, I just want to walk right out of this world,
'Cause everybody has a poison heart
I just want to walk right out of this world,
'Cause everybody has a poison heart.
Sunday, February 12, 2012
the war on boys. education. the lost generation.
D - does that sound preposterous to you? Read on, then decide.
PRIMARY SCHOOL
http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/curriculum/elementary/kindergarten.html
http://www.parentcentral.ca/parent/education/earlylearning/article/947216--900-more-ontario-schools-to-offer-full-day-kindergarten-in-2012-mcguinty
--------------
D - back in my day, we showed up to part-day kindergarten without even a rudimentary grasp of letter and numbers. Today, one would be hard pressed to find a parent that does not send their child to school the first day without already knowing these.
D - I'd much rather hold a boy back a year if he is not either overly old for his age bracket, or showing academic aptitude.
For this reason, I am not overly thrilled about the advent of all-day kindergarten.
----------
http://www.homeschool-your-boys.com/how-boys-learn.html
I just finished reading some eye-opening books by Dr. Leonard Sax: "Why Gender Matters" and "Boys Adrift". These books include scientific evidence showing that boys not only behave differently than girls, they also hear differently, see differently, respond to stress differently, and think differently.
(SIGHT) Implications for teaching boys
Do not expect boys to draw something recognizable or to draw something with lots of colors. When we find fault in this way, boys begin to think that art is for girls and not for boys.
Allow them to draw verbs and to do it in a way that is fast and furious.
Don't hold eye contact with a boy unless you're disciplining him.
(HEARING) Implications for teaching boys
Speak more loudly than you normally would and be very expressive.
Use lots of voice fluctuation and hand motions to engage boys.
While working with your son, sit down next to him, spread the materials out and look at them shoulder to shoulder.
(THOUGHT) Implications for teaching boys
Book learning is essential; but, without practical, hands-on experience, boys will hard a hard time grasping concepts that seem simple to us. They will disengage from their lessons.
Boys need real world experiences in their education which engage all of their senses.
Boys also need plenty of time outdoors.
Boys have a hard time processing their emotions. Don't ask boys "How would you FEEL if..." questions. Ask them "What would you DO if..." questions.
Boys like to have at least some control over their environments. Put each day's schoolwork into a folder and let them decide the order in which they will complete it.
--------------
D - perhaps the most dramatic and obvious difference in teaching boys would be the great temperature difference that is ideal for them. I wonder what temperature the classrooms are set at?
http://www.articlesaboutmen.com/2011/01/school-girls-learn-better-in-warmer-temperatures-but-boys-education-still-behind-study-finds-911/
New research from the UK shows that girls learned best if their classroom is warmed to 24 degrees Celsius, compared to 21 degrees Celsius for boys.
Researchers found the temperature affected the pupils’ nervous systems differently, with the warmth making the girls ready to learn and the boys slothful.
Other findings included the ideal lesson time for girls is an hour, for boys 30 minutes is better.The findings were published by the Girls’ Day School Trust (GDST), a chain of 26 schools in England and Wales.
Other findings included the ideal lesson time for girls is an hour, for boys 30 minutes is better.
D - I've read SIX DEGREES CELSIUS in some reports.
----------
http://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/resources/discussion_consultation/ConsultEduDisablty2?page=ConsultEduDisablty2-ELEMENTA.html
Research also indicates that boys are much more likely than girls to be diagnosed as learning disabled or emotionally disturbed.
D - my sis has 2 little girls. Only the boys go to the 'trouble chair'. My nieces refer to it as the 'boy chair'.
D - here is a no-brainer. Male teacher = male role model. Also = male style communication. As well as male optimized classroom setting.
BUT here is where things get even more ominous. Lil' boys were already problematic to teach and often unready for the necessary aptitudes at their age. It gets worse.
The trend in primary school is from few male teachers to VERY FEW.
http://professionallyspeaking.oct.ca/june_1999/gap.htm
D - even a decade ago, there was already concern at the trend away from male teachers.
D - and why? Beyond a lack of interest in dealing with kids, FEAR.
http://www.cea-ace.ca/education-canada/article/false-accusations-growing-fear-classroom
Generally speaking, the male-to-female ratio in elementary schools is 20-to-80; in secondary schools, 35-to-65. Whatever data one teases out, there is no question: our classrooms are increasingly dominated by female teachers.
-------------
http://jqstudies.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/jqstudies/article/view/3307/1421
D - nice primer on books and 'state of the union' on this.
Similarly, the Ontario College of Teachers (Bernard, Hill, Falter, & Wilson, 2004), which certifies teachers in the province, published a recent report entitled, Narrowing the Gender Gap: Attracting Men to Teaching, which examines the shortage of men in Ontario's teaching profession. They found that men represent only one in ten primary/junior teachers now and fewer than one in three secondary teachers.
-----------
The ongoing deterioration of boys in reading skills is having ripple effects later on in other subjects. Reading is central to all other endeavors in class.
------
HIGH SCHOOL
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/81-004-x/200410/7423-eng.htm
In the academic achievement assessments carried out by the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) for a large international sample of 15-year-olds, girls performed significantly better than boys on the reading test in all countries and in all ten Canadian provinces. In math and science, few significant differences were found when girls’ scores were compared to those of boys. Canada, France and Germany were the only countries where gender differences in math achievement were significant – but those differences were small, certainly much smaller than those observed for reading. At the provincial level, gender differences in achievement in math and in science also were not significant.-----------------
D - boys, starting from primary school, once they fall behind they tend to stay behind. Starting them later, or aggressive special ed would be needed to fix this.
Their verbal skills WILL catch up - much later. As in as young adults. If they have not been hopelessly stigmatized and streamed by then.
----------------------
Why does this matter? Is sitting down to read really essential for success in life? Well, it matters a great deal.
The concept of ‘reading literacy’ encompasses a wide range of skills and abilities used in everyday life, at school, at work, and at play (see Box 1). Reading schedules, learning from manuals, completing application forms, and grasping key issues of the day all require not just the technical ability to read words, but the more abstract ability to understand them, interpret them, and assimilate the concepts they convey.
Further, data from the 1994 International Adult Literacy Survey (IALS) show that individuals who have jobs that require little by way of literacy experience an erosion in the literacy skills they do have – a ‘use it or lose it’ relationship. When determining who gets training, employers tend to choose individuals with strong literacy skills, further widening the gap and limiting options for those who have poor literacy skills.
DROPOUTS
Between 1991 and 1999, the high school dropout rate decreased from 18% to 12%; however, males continued to drop out of school at a higher rate than females. In 1999, 15% of 20-year-old males had not completed high school, compared to 9% of females.
Generally, dropouts revealed attitudes and behaviours indicative of less academic engagement in school compared to high school graduates. Male dropouts, in particular, appear to have been less engaged in school. They were least likely to have spent a lot of time completing their homework, and if it was completed, they were less likely to have completed it on time.
A larger share of school graduates (89%) than dropouts (60%) remarked that they got along well with their teachers most or all of the time. Again, male dropouts were less likely to be positive in their assessment.
Overall, male dropouts, in particular, appear to have been less engaged and more dissatisfied with their academic experience. They were clearly less likely to be “interested in what [they were] learning in class” and more likely to believe that “many things [they were] learning in class were useless.”
--------
http://www4.hrsdc.gc.ca/.3ndic.1t.4r@-eng.jsp?iid=32
D - in these 2010 updated #s, notice the steady 5% gender gap in dropout rates.
--------
POST SECONDARY
http://www4.hrsdc.gc.ca/.3ndic.1t.4r@-eng.jsp?iid=29
D - look at the inversion of the gender undergrad grad rates by age.
The future is FEMALE.
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/100714/dq100714a-eng.htm
D - this is part of an on-going trend.
Undergraduate and graduate enrolment
Total undergraduate enrolment increased 1.2% to 822,501. Women accounted for 58.0% of enrolment at the undergraduate level.
In 2008/2009, 102,654 students were enrolled in a master's program, up 1.2% from the previous year. Women accounted for 55.7% of enrolment at the master's level.
At the doctorate level, enrolment rose 4.1% to 42,801 in 2008/2009. Men outnumbered women in doctorate programs, but by a slimmer margin than in previous years. Women accounted for 46.8% of doctorate students, up from 46.3% in 2007/2008.
D - first undergrad, now master's. Next stop - and soon! - PhDs.
D - with little else to complain about, the new target is PROFS.
http://www.canada.com/business/Report+reveals+gender+university+professor+salaries/3386082/story.html
(D - the first entry.)
Male professors at Canadian universities on average earn higher salaries than their female colleagues — with the discrepancy reaching more than $20,000 at some institutions, according to numbers released by Statistics Canada.
(D - buried later on, the universities respond, portrayed as apologetic.)
University officials, however, say these pay discrepancies aren't a sign of bias but instead the result of former hiring practices that favoured men, the age and rank of professors and the distribution of men and women in different disciplines.
"Certainly, when you actually factor in all those variables then, in fact, the gender differences in salary largely disappear," said Edith Hillan, vice-provost, faculty and academic life, at the University of Toronto.
Fields such as business, computer science and engineering tend to pay more and are dominated by men, while female-dominated fields, like social sciences and the humanities, pay less.
"In general, when you look at the data, unfortunately, I think it's probably only about 18 to 20 per cent of all full professors (are) women across Canada," Hillan said. "In a sense . . . a lot of it is the result of hiring practices in the past.
http://oncampus.macleans.ca/education/2010/07/26/do-universities-need-affirmative-action/
D - and, impatient for intergenerational changes with instant results, talk of affirmative action.
-------------------
SUMMARY
D - we see that existing trends will ensure the complete dominance of all tiers of post-secondary education by women. PhD programs, various man-dominated professions, and associate-then-full professors will all succumb, in that order. No additional impetus would be required to accomplish this. In fact, this will still take place even if all gov't gender-based programs and policies were dismantled now.
BUT this conclusion ignores the continuing changes taking place at the very foundation of the educational system, at the primary school level. The ongoing trend is to have virtually NO PRIMARY SCHOOL MALE TEACHERS, thereby aggravating existing trends. Female primary school teachers aggravate the high presence of boys in special education classes and programs.
At the high school level, male youths will then enter with even more stunted reading skills due to the above primary school education. Whatever advantage male youths have in science and math will thereby finally disappear. Males will drop out without a diploma at higher levels.
At the post-secondary level, most programs will be greatly dominated by young women. By then, half the senior profs will be women. Due to the ripple effect from primary to secondary to post-secondary school, men will gradually lose whatever hold they have on their remaining professional pre-eminence. The sole exceptions would be careers that don't allow any balance with family and other social considerations.
And there we have it. The future. Half our youth, based on gender, our future productive tax-paying working class, by and large wasted. I challenge you to find any other conclusion in the data. D.
OAS. the damage is done.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/economy/economy-lab/data-room/oas-expenditures-as-a-percentage-of-gdp/article2330887/
D - The verdict. Boomers get their way. GenXYZ get 'haircuts'.
No surprise.
G&M: have you considered learning how to make a chart that is NOT misleading? Don't start at 1% where folks expect 0% to be. Not without denoting it.
This is sensational and misinforming.
I'd be curious what the chart would look like if we de-indexed inflation from the clawback.
Oh wait- can't do that. It would mean the upper class Boomers would get a haircut too. Can't have that.
Well, it's official.
I give up on all the federal political parties.
my Record second opinion, 2000. on subsidized post-secondary education
Subsidizing tuition is the only way to make it accessible to all
[Final Edition]
Publication : The Record- Kitchener, Ont.
Author : Dino Snider
Date : Mar 1, 2000
Abstract (Document Summary)
There are "compelling reasons for taxpayers to have to pay more than they already do," and it is exactly because of the brain drain. If tuition is paid more by the students, they have larger debt loads when they graduate. This a real incentive to move to the U.S. to hide from these large debts, an incentive that is absent when tuitions are kept in line with the ability to repay them.
Students who are in programs that provide little promise of a career or job and "should not have bothered with university in the first place" likely were not aware that their education would leave them unemployable. I find it hard to believe that most ex-students who are now underemployed would have chosen their degrees had they known. Ostracizing students for unexpected shifts in the labour market seems unfair; I know nursing and teaching qualified students who went into their degrees when those skills were in demand, only to find no jobs waiting by the time they graduated...
------------
D - that was a retort to an earlier mean-spirited article.
I've ALWAYS fought the good fight.
[Final Edition]
Publication : The Record- Kitchener, Ont.
Author : Dino Snider
Date : Mar 1, 2000
Abstract (Document Summary)
There are "compelling reasons for taxpayers to have to pay more than they already do," and it is exactly because of the brain drain. If tuition is paid more by the students, they have larger debt loads when they graduate. This a real incentive to move to the U.S. to hide from these large debts, an incentive that is absent when tuitions are kept in line with the ability to repay them.
Students who are in programs that provide little promise of a career or job and "should not have bothered with university in the first place" likely were not aware that their education would leave them unemployable. I find it hard to believe that most ex-students who are now underemployed would have chosen their degrees had they known. Ostracizing students for unexpected shifts in the labour market seems unfair; I know nursing and teaching qualified students who went into their degrees when those skills were in demand, only to find no jobs waiting by the time they graduated...
------------
D - that was a retort to an earlier mean-spirited article.
I've ALWAYS fought the good fight.
Saturday, February 11, 2012
so you have kids. RESPs
http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/eng/learning/education_savings/publicsection/faqs_cesg.shtml
D - some devil-in-the-detail stuff. But all you have to know follows.
Who is eligible to receive the Grant?
Beneficiaries are eligible for the CESG up to the end of the calendar year in which they reach age 17 (certain conditions exist for beneficiaries 16 and 17 years of age). To be a recipient of the CESG the beneficiary must be a resident of Canada at the time the contribution is made, and have a valid Social Insurance Number (SIN).
How does the 16 and 17 rule work?
The Canada Education Savings Grant Program has been designed to encourage long term savings for post-secondary education.
There are special rules for beneficiaries in the years they become age 16 or 17. RESPs for beneficiaries aged 16 and 17 will be eligible only if at least one of the following conditions is met:
a minimum of $2,000 of contributions has been made to, and not withdrawn from, RESPs in respect of the beneficiary before the year in which the beneficiary attains 16 years of age; or
a minimum of $100 in annual contributions has been made to, and not withdrawn from, RESPs in respect of the beneficiary in at least any four years before the year in which the beneficiary attains 16 years of age.
This means that you must start to save in RESPs for your child before the end of the calendar year in which they turn 15 years of age in order to be eligible for the grant.
---------------
D - why bother? Best return with the matching grant, regardless.
Still a piddly amount. You're missing the point. IF - I say if - you come into unexpected decent money a few years later, you will be poised to take advantage of that.
Ideally, you plan carefully since that is cheapest.
E.g. for each of age 11,12,13,14, you invest $100. Seriously, that is NOT much.
With less planning things become more expensive.
Say, at age 15, a lump sum of $2000. And so on.
Why? Matching grant.
Government of Canada will contribute a grant of an additional 20% on top of your annual contribution, to a maximum of $500 a year, until the child turns 17. The CESG applies to any amount up to the first $2,500 you contribute each year, but you may contribute as much as $5,000 per year. By the time your child is ready for post-secondary education, your savings could have grown into a significant nest egg.
D - you could ask relatives to help set up that RESP when your kid hits the terrible tweens. That sends a message to your child. You have expectations - maybe they should have expectations of themself too? Powerful stuff.
Here's an idea. Let your kid save for themselves. You set it up. If they do some sort of work in high school, you direct it to the RESP - matching grant! Voila.
Expect this to get cut when the Boomer parasite starts to weaken the Canadian society host body.
D.
D - some devil-in-the-detail stuff. But all you have to know follows.
Who is eligible to receive the Grant?
Beneficiaries are eligible for the CESG up to the end of the calendar year in which they reach age 17 (certain conditions exist for beneficiaries 16 and 17 years of age). To be a recipient of the CESG the beneficiary must be a resident of Canada at the time the contribution is made, and have a valid Social Insurance Number (SIN).
How does the 16 and 17 rule work?
The Canada Education Savings Grant Program has been designed to encourage long term savings for post-secondary education.
There are special rules for beneficiaries in the years they become age 16 or 17. RESPs for beneficiaries aged 16 and 17 will be eligible only if at least one of the following conditions is met:
a minimum of $2,000 of contributions has been made to, and not withdrawn from, RESPs in respect of the beneficiary before the year in which the beneficiary attains 16 years of age; or
a minimum of $100 in annual contributions has been made to, and not withdrawn from, RESPs in respect of the beneficiary in at least any four years before the year in which the beneficiary attains 16 years of age.
This means that you must start to save in RESPs for your child before the end of the calendar year in which they turn 15 years of age in order to be eligible for the grant.
---------------
D - why bother? Best return with the matching grant, regardless.
Still a piddly amount. You're missing the point. IF - I say if - you come into unexpected decent money a few years later, you will be poised to take advantage of that.
Ideally, you plan carefully since that is cheapest.
E.g. for each of age 11,12,13,14, you invest $100. Seriously, that is NOT much.
With less planning things become more expensive.
Say, at age 15, a lump sum of $2000. And so on.
Why? Matching grant.
Government of Canada will contribute a grant of an additional 20% on top of your annual contribution, to a maximum of $500 a year, until the child turns 17. The CESG applies to any amount up to the first $2,500 you contribute each year, but you may contribute as much as $5,000 per year. By the time your child is ready for post-secondary education, your savings could have grown into a significant nest egg.
D - you could ask relatives to help set up that RESP when your kid hits the terrible tweens. That sends a message to your child. You have expectations - maybe they should have expectations of themself too? Powerful stuff.
Here's an idea. Let your kid save for themselves. You set it up. If they do some sort of work in high school, you direct it to the RESP - matching grant! Voila.
Expect this to get cut when the Boomer parasite starts to weaken the Canadian society host body.
D.
OAS untouched until 2020
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/story/2012/02/10/pol-flaherty-oas-2020.html
That means Canadians 57 and older should be able to expect to get the same benefits as seniors collecting them now.
The government has said any changes wouldn't affect anyone now collecting OAS, but hadn't given a specific date for when it expected the program to see cuts.
"This is not for tomorrow morning," Flaherty said in Oshawa, Ont., at an event with Conservative MP Colin Carrie.
"This is for 2020, 2025, so that people who are middle-aged and younger today, like Colin and not me, can be assured that they will have the social programs, properly funded, fiscally responsible. They will be here for them in the future."
-----------------
D - so this is a 'way to make OAS sustainable' - without cutting the Boomers, and still at the expense of GenXYZ.
D - I am STILL for deindexing the clawback right NOW. That would also have a negligible impact on them, but at least would gradually weed out the SIX DIGIT INCOMES that still feed at the trough.
And - wait for it- we will STILL have senior poverty.
Go team.
That means Canadians 57 and older should be able to expect to get the same benefits as seniors collecting them now.
The government has said any changes wouldn't affect anyone now collecting OAS, but hadn't given a specific date for when it expected the program to see cuts.
"This is not for tomorrow morning," Flaherty said in Oshawa, Ont., at an event with Conservative MP Colin Carrie.
"This is for 2020, 2025, so that people who are middle-aged and younger today, like Colin and not me, can be assured that they will have the social programs, properly funded, fiscally responsible. They will be here for them in the future."
-----------------
D - so this is a 'way to make OAS sustainable' - without cutting the Boomers, and still at the expense of GenXYZ.
D - I am STILL for deindexing the clawback right NOW. That would also have a negligible impact on them, but at least would gradually weed out the SIX DIGIT INCOMES that still feed at the trough.
And - wait for it- we will STILL have senior poverty.
Go team.
Friday, February 10, 2012
Cdns get worst return on their post-secondary education
https://secure.globeadvisor.com/servlet/ArticleNews/story/gam/20120210/SRRRSPYOUTHTRENDSATL
Mr. Dick-Agnew says he defines success as being debt free, and eliminating his remains a far more immediate concern than saving for the end of a professional life that he feels he is perpetually only beginning.
"I've had quite a few jobs over the years and I get by," he says. "But I know getting to the next level - home ownership, travelling, possibly even retiring - requires more than constancy. You can't be successful without skill, but skill is no guarantee either; it takes luck too."
The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development recently reported that Canada has the highest number of underpaid, highly educated citizens among member countries.
The federal Department of Finance last year estimated the return on investment for an undergraduate degree in the sciences to be between 12 per cent and 14 per cent; the return on a degree in humanities a measly 4 per cent to 6 per cent. The Canadian Labour Congress considers chronic underemployment and overwhelming debt to be the greatest challenges facing young Canadians.
--------------
D - why that is nestled in a story about RRSP savings, instead of being a headline in its own right, is quite beyond me.
--------------
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/business/finance/education-an-investment-and-source-of-debt--137995938.html
A report from TD Economics said the average rate of return on the cost of getting an undergraduate degree – now estimated at about $60,000 – is above 10 per cent and the return on investment of a college diploma, which has lower up-front costs, is even higher.
If the cost of a university education is high now, it’s only going to get worse. A child born in 2011 could face total costs of $140,000 for a degree when he or she is ready to enter university.
According to Statistics Canada, about 26 per cent of students take out government-funded student loans to pay for their education and students leave post-secondary school with an average debt of about $18,000.
In another study, BMO Financial Group found that although 69 per cent of Canadians are concerned about the affordability of a post-secondary education, only 56 per cent of Canadians with young children have a Registered Education Savings Plan (RESP), and of those who do, they are contributing less than usual because they don’t have enough money.
---------------
D - that amount of debt can increase in a hurry if you ignore it for a few years - at least when interest rates are normal.
Even though hiding in school during a recession might seem to make sense, even an entry level job can be used to pay down debt principal when interest rates are so low.
D - now instead of more-than-needed senior program funding, anything regarding RESPs will ensure the merit principle trumps an affluent upbringing, thereby ensuring justified social mobility and matching workers to work best.
------------------
http://www.poss.ca/en/node/2330
"18.5 per cent of Canadian grads earns less than half our country’s median income of $37,002. That's the highest number of underpaid and over-educated citizens in the OECD. Think about it. One in five university grads in Canada makes less than $18,501."
That is if they can find a job.
--------------------
http://oncampus.macleans.ca/education/2011/10/18/are-young-canadians-really-better-off-than-young-americans/
But consider this. Typical student debt, for those who have it, is almost identical in the two countries. The Canadian Federation of Students says that average graduate debt in Canada is $25,000. South of the border, average debt is $24,000, according to the Project on Student Debt.
Youth unemployment rates are similar too. Is there much difference between the 14 per cent rate reported by Statistics Canada and the 18 per cent reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics?
What’s more, a bachelor’s degree may open doors to higher earnings for some people, but according to a new report, 18.5 per cent of Canadian grads earns less than half our country’s median income of $37,002. That’s the highest number of underpaid and over-educated citizens in the OECD. Think about it. One in five university grads in Canada makes less than $18,501.
And what about the graduates in Canada who are working, but in jobs that they could have gotten without a university degree? According to the most recent Labour Force Survey, the industry with the largest employment gains in September was accommodation and food services. Needless to say, some of those jobs can be done without degrees—and without student debt.
-----------
D - you don`t hear about this much. Economic failure, particulary with the high expectations of family, make this a shameful secret.
Thursday, February 9, 2012
sub-Boomers don't have retirement plan in place
http://www.therecord.com/news/business/article/667379--younger-canadians-not-planning-for-retirement-as-much-as-boomers-rbc-poll-shows
D - strange that the web title is different than the paper one.
The paper one says, "younger Canadians struggle to plan for retirement, unlike boomers, polls shows" whereas the web version says, "Younger Canadians not planning for retirement as much as boomers, RBC poll shows", which puts a quite different spin on it. In one, the situation is happening to the young. In the other, they are failing to plan - it is their own fault.
---------------------
More than 70 per cent of respondents from both groups say they worry about balancing saving for immediate priorities with putting money aside for retirement.
However, while six-in-ten younger Canadians say they don’t have a plan, about the same number of older respondents said they’ve already got a road map in place.
More than half of baby boomers say they had a plan written down, compared with just over one-quarter of younger Canadians.
The banks says around 43 per cent of younger Canadians now have registered retirement savings plans, while 69 per cent of boomers have RRSPs...
There have been many surveys, reports and warning signs recently that have suggested Canadians, especially those close to retirement, have either not saved enough, are still in debt, or are being forced to work longer.
D - I'm thinking of pairing RRSPs and TFSAs in equal proportion. The TFSA is the 'safe' investment - likely to pan out no matter what, though with low returns.
Since I'm 40 with NO savings, and I'm still looking for full-time work (though I juggle TWO part-time ones), it seems unlikely I'll be in any position to max out RRSPs. In fact, I need a a Jack and the beanstalk style 'magic bean' solution to ever retire.
Clearly, according to the web headline, that is my fault. And my whole generation's.
D - strange that the web title is different than the paper one.
The paper one says, "younger Canadians struggle to plan for retirement, unlike boomers, polls shows" whereas the web version says, "Younger Canadians not planning for retirement as much as boomers, RBC poll shows", which puts a quite different spin on it. In one, the situation is happening to the young. In the other, they are failing to plan - it is their own fault.
---------------------
More than 70 per cent of respondents from both groups say they worry about balancing saving for immediate priorities with putting money aside for retirement.
However, while six-in-ten younger Canadians say they don’t have a plan, about the same number of older respondents said they’ve already got a road map in place.
More than half of baby boomers say they had a plan written down, compared with just over one-quarter of younger Canadians.
The banks says around 43 per cent of younger Canadians now have registered retirement savings plans, while 69 per cent of boomers have RRSPs...
There have been many surveys, reports and warning signs recently that have suggested Canadians, especially those close to retirement, have either not saved enough, are still in debt, or are being forced to work longer.
D - I'm thinking of pairing RRSPs and TFSAs in equal proportion. The TFSA is the 'safe' investment - likely to pan out no matter what, though with low returns.
Since I'm 40 with NO savings, and I'm still looking for full-time work (though I juggle TWO part-time ones), it seems unlikely I'll be in any position to max out RRSPs. In fact, I need a a Jack and the beanstalk style 'magic bean' solution to ever retire.
Clearly, according to the web headline, that is my fault. And my whole generation's.
where to hide the $ when betrayal comes
(From Movie "Firefly": (playing with toy dinosaurs))
"Curse you and your sudden but inevitable betrayal!"
http://www.retirement-how-to.com/retirement-saving/defend-savings-from-a-surprise-tax-grab-globe-and-mail.html
So health care and old age income programs will sap funding from productive investment in future workers.
But it won't stop there.
They'll ret-con the rules on tax too. The obvious first step will be to hike income (and other) taxes. But this will yield diminishing results and result in rebellion at some point.
So what is a generation intend on leaving a fiscal "scorched earth" behind for their descendants to do, when so stymied?
Change the rules on RRSPs and TFSAs.
The article sez use a mix of BOTH - this likely means maxing out the tax free savings account.
-------
Now let’s jump ahead a decade or so and imagine that efforts to keep spending in hand have not worked out. Hungry for revenue, the government looks for ways to cut spending and raise taxes. As part of an effort to ensure all segments of the population share the pain, registered retirement savings plans and tax-free savings accounts come under review.
The usual point of comparison between TFSAs and RRSPs is the amount of tax you pay on the money you contribute today, and on the money you’ll withdraw in the future. Now, there’s something else to think about. Which savings vehicle is easier for the government to raid for extra revenue?
RRSPs get the nod here for sure, but TFSAs could get whacked, too, if the government needed every possible cent of tax revenue. That’s why today’s smart savers will hedge their retirement savings by using both.
-----
D - it takes more "ret-con" gerrymandering to raid 'no tax paid after' accounts than 'just vary the rules' on RSSPs. Not that it is impossible. Just harder.
D - I have a bad feeling about Harper's OAS changes. They'll do NOTHING to reduce senior poverty, or end the whole-middle-class-plus-lower-upper-class feeding frenzy at the trough of what is purportedly an anti-poverty program.
Right. Money says it will exempt the bulk of Boomers, certainly the early ones.
"Curse you and your sudden but inevitable betrayal!"
http://www.retirement-how-to.com/retirement-saving/defend-savings-from-a-surprise-tax-grab-globe-and-mail.html
So health care and old age income programs will sap funding from productive investment in future workers.
But it won't stop there.
They'll ret-con the rules on tax too. The obvious first step will be to hike income (and other) taxes. But this will yield diminishing results and result in rebellion at some point.
So what is a generation intend on leaving a fiscal "scorched earth" behind for their descendants to do, when so stymied?
Change the rules on RRSPs and TFSAs.
The article sez use a mix of BOTH - this likely means maxing out the tax free savings account.
-------
Now let’s jump ahead a decade or so and imagine that efforts to keep spending in hand have not worked out. Hungry for revenue, the government looks for ways to cut spending and raise taxes. As part of an effort to ensure all segments of the population share the pain, registered retirement savings plans and tax-free savings accounts come under review.
The usual point of comparison between TFSAs and RRSPs is the amount of tax you pay on the money you contribute today, and on the money you’ll withdraw in the future. Now, there’s something else to think about. Which savings vehicle is easier for the government to raid for extra revenue?
RRSPs get the nod here for sure, but TFSAs could get whacked, too, if the government needed every possible cent of tax revenue. That’s why today’s smart savers will hedge their retirement savings by using both.
-----
D - it takes more "ret-con" gerrymandering to raid 'no tax paid after' accounts than 'just vary the rules' on RSSPs. Not that it is impossible. Just harder.
D - I have a bad feeling about Harper's OAS changes. They'll do NOTHING to reduce senior poverty, or end the whole-middle-class-plus-lower-upper-class feeding frenzy at the trough of what is purportedly an anti-poverty program.
Right. Money says it will exempt the bulk of Boomers, certainly the early ones.
Tuesday, February 7, 2012
canada bankruptcy rates
Consumer Bankruptcies in Canada - A Short History
In Canada, from 1958 to 1971, the consumer bankruptcy rate was at a fairly constant level, and, for a modern industrialized country, the bankruptcy rate was at a very low level. For example, in 1968, Canada had six (6) bankruptcies per 100,000 population. The United States, in 1968, had ninety (90) bankruptcies per 100,000 population.
A special joint committee of the Senate and House of Commons on consumer credit, under the joint chairmanship of Senator David A. Croll and Ron Basford, MP, had finished hearing briefs and had tabled its report in 1967. In 1970, the Tasse report on bankruptcy and insolvency was presented, and, in 1971, a special Senate committee on poverty, under the chairmanship of Senator David A. Croll, was hearing about the problems of low income individuals from coast to coast. For the first time, members of those committees heard of the human tragedy of people and families trapped in impossible debt situations with no relief available. In 1972, in response to recommendations in each of these reports, the Federal Government started the Poor Debtors' Assistance Program. In the period from 1972 to 1981, the bankruptcy rate rose steeply.
In 1982, the consumer bankruptcy rate jumped dramatically from 23,000 in 1981 to more than 30,000. This 33% increase over the previous year was caused by the severe worldwide recession. From 1983 to 1985, the bankruptcy rate in Canada fell in response to the strengthening economy. Since 1985, the consumer bankruptcy rate has risen steeply, hitting record numbers in 1997 and then declining slightly in 1998.
In 2004, the consumer bankruptcy rate in Canada was 2.7 per 1,000 population. This compares with the U.S. bankruptcy rate for the same period of 7.7 per 1,000 population. British Columbia has the lowest consumer bankruptcy rate of any region in Canada at 2.0 bankruptcies per 1,000 population.
(image from last post too)
-----
http://edmontonhousingbust.com/files/100610-1.jpg (image)
http://edmontonhousingbust.com/2010/06/
------------
http://www.bankruptcycanada.com/StudentLnIntbyCountry.gif
D - maybe you thought times were tough all around? Y'know, global recessions and all. Sure. But our interest rate for student loans compared to other nations is OUT OF SIGHT!
This, along with a few other gov't policy shifts, ensures the 1st half of my working lifetime would be a wasteland.
When I got out of U, I was paying nearly 10% on one of my loans. An entry level job (at the min. wage of the time) could not touch the principal.
D - so let's look at those time limit bankruptcy changes for student loans.
July 7, 2008 New Student Loan Bankruptcy Laws go into effect.
Student loan debt will be eligible for discharge in bankruptcy if seven years have passed since the former student ceased to be a full or part time student.
http://www.bankruptcycanada.com/studentloans1.htm
June 30, 2005 - Justice Gordon Sedgwick of Ontario Superior Court ruled today that student loan debtors don't constitute a specific group that should be protected from discrimination under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
This means that the law stating that student loan debt cannot be erased in a bankruptcy until the student has been out of school for 10 or more years remains law.
This law was rushed through parilament and made law in June of 1998. The law is seen by almost all insolvency professionals as unfair and discrimnatory because students are the only group that cannot wipe out their debt in a bankruptcy in the time afforded all other dischargable debt.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Student_loans_in_Canada#History
The CSLP was created in 1964. Since its inception, the Program has supplemented the financial resources available to eligible students from other sources to assist in their pursuit of post-secondary education. Between 1964 and 1995 , loans were provided by financial institutions to post-secondary students who were approved to receive financial assistance
D - once again, cuz the Boomers are entitled. Universally. Period.
Students have the choice of opting for a fixed interest rate of prime interest rate + 5%, or a floating interest rate of prime interest rate + 2.5%. Newfoundland and Labrador is the only province where there is no interest on the provincial loan.
D - yup they're trying to make money here. Unlike other nations.
http://student-loan-bankruptcy.ca/
D - good site with hard technical data on 'how-to' student bankrtupcies.
http://publications.gc.ca/collections/Collection-R/LoPBdP/BP/prb0126-e.htm
In 1992, major changes to Canadian bankruptcy law took effect; one of these changes abolished preferred creditor status for debts owed to the government. This change relegated the Crown to the ranks of ordinary creditors who would share pro-rata in the bankrupt debtor’s assets after secured creditors and preferred creditors. Consequently, the Crown had no priority over other creditors for student loan debts.
Amendments to the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (BIA) that took effect in September 1997 changed the status of student loan debts by making them non-dischargeable if a student filed for bankruptcy before ceasing full- or part-time studies or within two years after studies ended.
D - And (checking chart) yup, the 92 and 98 changes both led to temporary delays in student bankruptcies. For 2 and 10 years respectively the #s march in lock-step to my prediction.
And then. Marches up again. Cuz nothing else had changed.
http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/LOP/ResearchPublications/prb0126-e.htm#studentbankruptcy
Student Loan Debt and Bankruptcy Levels
Statistics Canada data confirm that the number of bankruptcies involving loans under the Canada Student Loans Program rose during the 1990s. Data on student debt from 1990-1991 to 1995-1996 also reveal:
in the 1990s, the level of student loan debt increased;
more students encountered problems repaying their loans shortly after leaving school – in 1995-1996, 30.9% of students had difficulty repaying their loans in the first year after leaving school compared to 21.7% in 1990-1991...
after accounting for graduates who had no loans and those who paid off their loans entirely, loan repayment problems were reported for 10% to 15% of the 1995 graduates.(9)
Other studies also shed light on the student bankruptcy issue. An Empirical Study of Canadians Seeking Personal Bankruptcy Protection (1998) by Saul Schwartz and Leigh Anderson confirms the importance of student loans as a factor in the bankruptcy of younger Canadians. Schwartz and Anderson report:
For young people seeking bankruptcy, student loans were very likely to comprise a large share of overall debt. For 28% of the young people, student loans were 50% or more of the overall debt and, for 10%, student loans were more than 90% of total debt...
In a 1999 paper, Saul Schwartz notes that approximately 9% of Canada student loan borrowers had defaulted on their loan obligations in 1980, but by 1990, the Auditor General of Canada had put the default rate at “one in six.”(11) As the number of student bankruptcies rose, so did the cost to government. In 1996-1997, for example, student loans in bankruptcy reportedly cost the federal government $70 million, up from $30 million in 1990-1991.(12)
Using data pertaining to more than 1,000 debtors who filed for bankruptcy in 1997, Schwartz examined the situation of bankrupt individuals with student loan debts. Comparing the economic status of those individuals with the overall sample, Schwartz concluded:
Schwartz summarized his findings this way:
The economic situation of all those declaring bankruptcy suggests that bankruptcy is used primarily as a last resort. The economic situation of those seeking bankruptcy protection with student loans among their debts, or whose student loans were critical in their bankruptcy, is even worse than the already desperate situation of the whole group. To be sure, they are younger and have more education, but they have lower annual household income and lower monthly income at the time of filing for bankruptcy. More than 40% had received income assistance in the two years previous to filing, and about 30% had received unemployment insurance. A surprisingly large proportion – more than one-third – had occupations that were unskilled.(17)
This conclusion was echoed in a report funded by the Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy in 2005, which examined the treatment of government-funded student loans in bankruptcy, both in Canada and in four other countries. This report noted that while the main motivation for the policy of requiring student loans to survive bankruptcy in all of these countries was a perception that students were using bankruptcy casually to avoid repaying their loans, the factual record to support this perception was thin to non-existent.
--------------
D - the simple explanation is that Boomers, once working, backed gov't solutions that reduced subsidies to post-secondary institution operating budgets. Then they stripped away student grants. Then they faced a student bankruptcy scenario of their making.
D - the new '7 year rule' was a wishy-washy compromise between the widely criticised '10 year rule' and a '5 year' counter proposal.
------------
http://thesheaf.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/sept8studentloansPIC_original.jpg (image)
D - my god, misleading chart. Angling a 2D chart to distort it? Really?!
D - next stop: to prove that Boomer grad DID do exactly that - bankrupted on negligible loans simply because there was no reason not to. That info will taking digging.
Keep in mind that such a bankruptcy did not show up on their credit report. I have things to do now. TTYL.
on minimum wage
http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/LOP/ResearchPublications/prb0839-e.htm
Although the incidence of low income has declined significantly since 1997, its level in 2006 was similar to that found in the late 1980s...
Prior to 1996, the federal government set its own minimum wage rate, a single rate that was applied to all employers covered under Part III of the Canada Labour Code. Since that time, the federal minimum wage has been set according to the applicable provincial or territorial legislated rate for adult workers.(3) Consequently, there are 13 different federal minimum wage rates applied to workers covered under Part III of the Canada Labour Code.(4) Figure 1 provides a graphic illustration of 2008 regional federal minimum wages, which range from a low of $7.75 per hour in New Brunswick to a high of $10.00 per hour in Nunavut...
Between 1997 and 2007, the average federal minimum wage increased by some 21%. However, when adjusted for inflation, the average federal minimum wage declined slightly (less than 5%) during the same period.
-------
http://maytree.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/figure1_national_average_minimum_wage1.jpg (image)
D- min. wage peaked in 1976 (Boomers) and bottomed out by 1985 (Xers).
D - it is not any 1 measurement, or any 1 policy that accounts for generational differences. It is ALL of them in synergy.
---------------
http://www4.hrsdc.gc.ca/auto/diagramme-chart/stg2/c_15_54_1_4_eng.png?20091025165225865 (image)
D - this chart ignores the cost in principal and interest in paying back a student loan.
D - I saw a surprising min. wage chart for the USA. The young adults had worse hourly wages than teens - when they're working thru school.
-------------
And wage means little without the context of income tax.
http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/fq/txrts-eng.html
Federal tax rates for 2012
15% on the first $42,707 of taxable income, +
22% on the next $42,707 of taxable income (on the portion of taxable income over $42,707 up to $85,414), +
26% on the next $46,992 of taxable income (on the portion of taxable income over $85,414 up to $132,406), +
29% of taxable income over $132,406.
Ontario 5.05% on the first $39,020 of taxable income, +
9.15% on the next $39,023, +
11.16% on the amount over $78,043
D - notice anything? They gouge the middle class, then increases in tax rate for the upper class starts to level out. Not particularly progressive, particulary when all those credits and exemptions are considered. Me, I'm all for a pretty much flat tax, if it means no exemptions. At least I could file my own tax form then.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_Canada#Personal_income_taxes
Income taxes throughout Canada are progressive with the high income residents paying a higher percentage than the low income residents. However, a study conducted by Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, and released on November 8, 2007, found that the richest pay the lowest rates of all income groups.[1]
D - aside: I tried 1 year. I could not figure out for the life of me where the rent rebate went. Turns out it was under the category 'property owned'. I don't own any property so I ignored that category. Clear as MUD.
------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopsony#Minimum_wage
D - economic theory behind setting min. wage. A bit beyond me.
------------
D - so somebody working full time at minimum wage is already paying income tax. Folks wonder how welfare and disability get exploited by the undeserving. Perhaps they should ask WHY it is. The answer is we punish work ethic, and artificially depress entry-level workers into poverty with our tax policy. I should know. I spent my 20s and early 30s getting taxed with an income typically between the absolute and relative poverty lines.
BTW, I could have paid off my student loan if I was not being artificially depressed into a lower poverty rung by income tax. So how much gov't / society gained from this strategy is dubious.
---------------
Little change in low income rates
The incidence of low income in Canada remained relatively stable in 2009 using the after-tax low income cut-offs. Nearly 3.2 million Canadians, or 9.6% of the population, lived in low income, virtually unchanged from 2008.
About 634,000 children aged 17 and under, or 9.5%, lived in low-income families in 2009, also virtually unchanged. This proportion was roughly half the peak of 18% in 1996.
D - we made good inroads into child poverty. Note that senior poverty levels are lower than any other group.
(statscan) In the late 1970s, Canada’s seniors were the most likely families to experience low income, with nearly 20% earning less than the low income cut-off. Pension program reforms at the end of the 1970s helped this rate to decline sharply, so that by 2006 senior families had Canada’s lowest incidence of low income, at 2.3%.
While it seems particularly humane to address senior poverty, the societal payoff takes place while we are still 'investing' in children.
Living in poverty trims 9IQ points off a child, on average.
In other words, we stunt our future geniuses.
-------------
http://www41.statcan.ca/2008/3868/ceb3868_000-eng.htm
Gains for all families
From 1997 to 2006, the median after-tax annual income of families composed of two or more people grew 18%, from $49,400 to $58,300 (2006 constant dollars). This period of sustained growth follows two decades where the median after-tax income for most families grew very little or even declined...
Median after-tax incomes for unattached elderly men and women grew the slowest from 1997 to 2006, at 11% and 14% respectively. Lone-parent families saw the most income growth during the past decade: their median after-tax income increased by almost half, from $23,800 in 1997 to $34,900 in 2006.
----------
D - as we'd expect with my "benign neglect" hypothesis. Once Boomers were in the workplace and getting divorced, well, there it is. The #s support the hypothesis.
------------
Government transfers can make up a sizeable portion of family income. From 2005 to 2006, unattached individuals and families of two or more people saw their median transfers rise from $3,100 to $3,500.
Child tax benefit programs were changed and new federal and provincial benefits were introduced in 2006, increasing not only the amounts transferred to families, but also the proportion of families receiving transfers
------------
D - not just tax rate. Also fiscal policy - child tax credits. Once again, as we'd expect from Boomers reaching the heyday of their political clout and income earning potential.
D - here's a prediction. The child tax credit will suddenly get de-emphasized once the Boomers have all retired, despite the more onerous burden of parenting facing the younger generations.
----------
http://www.bankruptcycanada.com/images/BankChart1980-2010.gif (image)
D - looks like times got tougher after 1980. Though not the chart is not adjusted per-capita for population growth.
D - really spiked during the 'jobless recovery' of 1991- which also coincides with when tuition started increasing 10% per year.
I suspect the brief plateaus can be linked to student loan rules about time out of school. Though it did nothing to halt such trends in the long term - it merely increased the suffering during those years for grads in need of succor.
Well try as I might, I cannot find an annual historical chart of basic income tax exemptions.
The first income tax act:
http://www.duhaime.org/LawMuseum/CanadianLegalHistory/LawArticle-168/1917-The-Birth-of-Income-Tax.aspx
-----------
http://worthwhile.typepad.com/worthwhile_canadian_initi/images/minwage_avwage.png (image)
D - note how it plummets between the 80s and 90s as a proportion of typical hourly wage (US? but relevant). Why? The Boomers had moved past entry level starter jobs. They no longer CARED.
It stays there through the youth and young adulthood of GenX.
retirement age across the world. trend.
http://www.thestar.com/news/insight/article/1126150--raising-canadians-pension-age
But making seniors wait longer for their money is a trend underway in other parts of the world.
Government approaches and recipient ages vary widely, with some increases using very long transitions, but the trend appears undeniable.
The chart makes it clear that pension evolution, whether a reflection of governments’ financial anxieties or a population of healthier, more active 60-somethings capable of working longer, is a fact of life on the global landscape.
Saturday, February 4, 2012
Margaret Wente, will you marry me? <:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/margaret-wente/the-war-against-the-young/article2322982/
And despite what Ms. Eng says, nobody pays for it in advance. It comes from current general tax revenue.
The poverty rate among the elderly in Canada is 5.9 per cent, much lower than it is for children or those of working age.
Now, our biggest social problem is not how to redistribute more money to the needy old. It’s how to protect everyone else from the tsunami of geezers that’s about to crash on our shores and suck the wealth of future generations out to sea. The war against seniors’ pension reforms is a war against the young.
When the federal government introduced OAS in 1952, the qualifying age was 70 and many people didn’t live long enough to collect it. Today, it’s 65, and a Canadian of that age can expect to collect OAS for nearly 20 years.
Are we really sure we want to transfer so much wealth from struggling young families to relatively well-off geezers? How smart is it to suck our grandchildren dry? How many schools won’t get built because we’re buying Lipitor for people who can already afford to pay for it?
And despite what Ms. Eng says, nobody pays for it in advance. It comes from current general tax revenue.
The poverty rate among the elderly in Canada is 5.9 per cent, much lower than it is for children or those of working age.
Now, our biggest social problem is not how to redistribute more money to the needy old. It’s how to protect everyone else from the tsunami of geezers that’s about to crash on our shores and suck the wealth of future generations out to sea. The war against seniors’ pension reforms is a war against the young.
When the federal government introduced OAS in 1952, the qualifying age was 70 and many people didn’t live long enough to collect it. Today, it’s 65, and a Canadian of that age can expect to collect OAS for nearly 20 years.
Are we really sure we want to transfer so much wealth from struggling young families to relatively well-off geezers? How smart is it to suck our grandchildren dry? How many schools won’t get built because we’re buying Lipitor for people who can already afford to pay for it?
Thursday, February 2, 2012
Education. What's hot, what's not.
http://www.mindflash.com/blog/2011/12/infographic-which-college-majors/
Hmm, clinical psychology is even MORE unemployable than fine arts? And history? That says something.
I was surprised by library science though.
Can't go wrong with emerging high tech.
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
for a later mandatory retirement age for CPP
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/opinion/well-keep-working-past-65-and-well-like-it/article2320096/
Such reforms, far from taking something away from seniors, are a tiny step in reversing decades of bad policy that has marginalized older Canadians, damaged their health and harmed their morale. Raising the age of eligibility is emphatically not a matter of imposing costs on seniors in order to benefit the rest of the population. It is an exceptionally pro-seniors policy to reduce the incentives to stop working at 65.
...
There was a time when 65 and retirement were closely linked for a compelling reason. A life of labour had left the average worker depleted.
...
Age 65 and the moment when one can no longer reasonably be expected to work have long since parted company. We live longer and are in better health. Much of the work in our increasingly service-based economy is not physically taxing.
More than four-fifths of Canadians say they would like to continue to work even if they had enough money to retire. And nearly half of Canadians of working age already expect to work beyond the age of 65, and not just for economic reasons, according to a survey done for one financial institution: “Nearly all of those who expect to work beyond age 65 cite one or more lifestyle reasons, including remaining mentally active, enjoyment of their jobs and the interaction with their co-workers.” In other words, future retirees are coming more and more to realize that work (although not necessarily any particular job, a distinction many people seem to have difficulty grasping), is closely related to happiness.
------------
D - I do express some concerns about hard physical work that late.
Such reforms, far from taking something away from seniors, are a tiny step in reversing decades of bad policy that has marginalized older Canadians, damaged their health and harmed their morale. Raising the age of eligibility is emphatically not a matter of imposing costs on seniors in order to benefit the rest of the population. It is an exceptionally pro-seniors policy to reduce the incentives to stop working at 65.
...
There was a time when 65 and retirement were closely linked for a compelling reason. A life of labour had left the average worker depleted.
...
Age 65 and the moment when one can no longer reasonably be expected to work have long since parted company. We live longer and are in better health. Much of the work in our increasingly service-based economy is not physically taxing.
More than four-fifths of Canadians say they would like to continue to work even if they had enough money to retire. And nearly half of Canadians of working age already expect to work beyond the age of 65, and not just for economic reasons, according to a survey done for one financial institution: “Nearly all of those who expect to work beyond age 65 cite one or more lifestyle reasons, including remaining mentally active, enjoyment of their jobs and the interaction with their co-workers.” In other words, future retirees are coming more and more to realize that work (although not necessarily any particular job, a distinction many people seem to have difficulty grasping), is closely related to happiness.
------------
D - I do express some concerns about hard physical work that late.
waterloo voted most age friendly by WHO
http://www.therecord.com/news/local/article/662815--world-health-organization-declares-waterloo-an-age-friendly-city
The international body has added Waterloo to its global network of age-friendly cities, which rewards municipalities for planning, maintenance and social services that accommodate older residents.
Waterloo is the eighth Canadian city to receive the honour, joining the ranks of London and Halifax. Waterloo is the 42nd member of the Global Network of Age-Friendly Cities.
“This is big stuff. We’re number 42 in the world,” said Arlene Groh, who chairs the mayor’s committee on advisory committee on age-friendly cities that submitted the application to join the network.
------
D - well that is something to be proud of. My home town! <:
The international body has added Waterloo to its global network of age-friendly cities, which rewards municipalities for planning, maintenance and social services that accommodate older residents.
Waterloo is the eighth Canadian city to receive the honour, joining the ranks of London and Halifax. Waterloo is the 42nd member of the Global Network of Age-Friendly Cities.
“This is big stuff. We’re number 42 in the world,” said Arlene Groh, who chairs the mayor’s committee on advisory committee on age-friendly cities that submitted the application to join the network.
------
D - well that is something to be proud of. My home town! <:
'OAS' sustainability is wrong question
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/taxseason/story/2012/01/31/old-age-security-sutainability.html
OAS provides a monthly cheque to Canadians, 65 years of age or older. Those who live in Canada must have lived in the country for at least 10 years after the age of 18 to be eligible for the payments; for those living outside Canada, the residency minimum is 20 years after the age of 18. People who are still earning an income of around $68,000 will have some of their OAS money clawed back. Those making around $108,000 aren't eligible for any benefit.
------------------
D - first of all, the top # is closer to $110,000 than $108,000.
For 2011, the tax recovery applies to persons whose net income exceeds $67,668. For each $1 of income above this limit, the amount of basic Old Age Security pension reduces by $0.15.
-------------------
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/investment-ideas/portfolio-strategy/how-to-avoid-the-dreaded-oas-clawback/article2037894/
OAS is a federal social program designed to provide a very modest pension to low- to middle-income retirees. The maximum monthly benefit right now is $526.85 or $6,322.20 a year. The clawback of OAS benefits starts with a net income of $67,668 and it completely eliminates OAS with income of $109,764.
----------------
D - "Sustainable" is the wrong question. "Fair" is.
OAS should pay out enough to raise seniors out of poverty.
The international comparisons focus upon 'median income', which is about $25,000 for a single Canadian.
By re-arranging existing OAS funding, we could end senior poverty just like that. Forget placing HIGHER on the survey - we're already very good. Let's just END senior poverty.
Since present and near-future older retirees were counting on the middle class 'feeding trough' mentality present in OAS funding, we cannot just suddenly do this.
A very minor - painless- and effective policy would be to simply -just -only de-index the clawback level from inflation.
This would eventually drive down the clawback to the median income, as per international senior poverty studies.
"Sustainable" is the wrong question. Why would GenX, 1/2 the size of Boomers, often working at
a) below LICO relative poverty line
b) above LICO but below median Canadian income
be paying to redistribute income to HIGHER income brackets, in a regressive vs progressive fiscal policy?
That OAS was originally -and rhetorically, nominally still is- an anti-poverty measure merely makes this even more UNFAIR.
D.
OAS provides a monthly cheque to Canadians, 65 years of age or older. Those who live in Canada must have lived in the country for at least 10 years after the age of 18 to be eligible for the payments; for those living outside Canada, the residency minimum is 20 years after the age of 18. People who are still earning an income of around $68,000 will have some of their OAS money clawed back. Those making around $108,000 aren't eligible for any benefit.
------------------
D - first of all, the top # is closer to $110,000 than $108,000.
For 2011, the tax recovery applies to persons whose net income exceeds $67,668. For each $1 of income above this limit, the amount of basic Old Age Security pension reduces by $0.15.
-------------------
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/investment-ideas/portfolio-strategy/how-to-avoid-the-dreaded-oas-clawback/article2037894/
OAS is a federal social program designed to provide a very modest pension to low- to middle-income retirees. The maximum monthly benefit right now is $526.85 or $6,322.20 a year. The clawback of OAS benefits starts with a net income of $67,668 and it completely eliminates OAS with income of $109,764.
----------------
D - "Sustainable" is the wrong question. "Fair" is.
OAS should pay out enough to raise seniors out of poverty.
The international comparisons focus upon 'median income', which is about $25,000 for a single Canadian.
By re-arranging existing OAS funding, we could end senior poverty just like that. Forget placing HIGHER on the survey - we're already very good. Let's just END senior poverty.
Since present and near-future older retirees were counting on the middle class 'feeding trough' mentality present in OAS funding, we cannot just suddenly do this.
A very minor - painless- and effective policy would be to simply -just -only de-index the clawback level from inflation.
This would eventually drive down the clawback to the median income, as per international senior poverty studies.
"Sustainable" is the wrong question. Why would GenX, 1/2 the size of Boomers, often working at
a) below LICO relative poverty line
b) above LICO but below median Canadian income
be paying to redistribute income to HIGHER income brackets, in a regressive vs progressive fiscal policy?
That OAS was originally -and rhetorically, nominally still is- an anti-poverty measure merely makes this even more UNFAIR.
D.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)