Seniors Take It On The Chin
Seniors are taking it on the chin, or maybe somewhere a bit lower. While seniors saw their CPP rise a paltry 0.4% (about $50 per year), the Brant County and City of Brantford Councils go along merrily raising taxes by 3.27 (or $67 for the "average homeowner") in the county and 2.27% (or $56) for the city and civic workers get raises in 2%- 3% range. These property tax increases (for some strange reason) don't take into account the increase assessment valuations on properties, so the actual tax increase will be more like 6% - 10%.
The reason for the less than one half of one per cent raise in the CPP was because the Federal Government says that this was the rate of inflation. So these tax hikes are far, far above the inflation rate. How can councilors justify this?
And, as well as these major tax hikes, seniors and all other homeowners, were just hit with an increase in electricity costs which will be much greater when so called "smart meters" with their much higher rates are installed in the next little while. And if that isn't enough, starting July 1st the new blended HST (the largest tax grab in the history of Ontario) comes into effect.
So, by the end of this year, the politicians and civil servants will still be doing alright, but most seniors will find themselves with a lot less disposable income. And many will be facing the choice "food or shelter".
The reason for the less than one half of one per cent raise in the CPP was because the Federal Government says that this was the rate of inflation. So these tax hikes are far, far above the inflation rate. How can councilors justify this?
And, as well as these major tax hikes, seniors and all other homeowners, were just hit with an increase in electricity costs which will be much greater when so called "smart meters" with their much higher rates are installed in the next little while. And if that isn't enough, starting July 1st the new blended HST (the largest tax grab in the history of Ontario) comes into effect.
So, by the end of this year, the politicians and civil servants will still be doing alright, but most seniors will find themselves with a lot less disposable income. And many will be facing the choice "food or shelter".
posted by The Grouchy Old Man at 8:04 PM
5 Comments:
You seniors are always bitching about how hard done by you are. If you had of saved for your retirement, maybe you wouldn't be so badly off. I'm tired of always having to pay to support a bunch of old people who do nothing but complain.
Sorry you feel that way and I hope that you are able to save up for retirement but that was not the case for many seniors. Back in the fifties, sixties and seventies many jobs didn't provide private pension plans and those that did were often quite small and usually you had to work at the same place for at least ten years before your pension was vested. And usually if the husband died the pension ended leaving widows with only CPP and OAS to live on. And if a plant went out of business any pension plan disappeared with it. There were many cases like this in both big and small industries in Brantford.Most single pensioners today receive payments that are at or below the poverty line and far less than even those receiving minimum wage make. And speaking of that, the minimum wage is scheduled to increase 75ยข per hour at the end of this month or an 8% increase, 20 times more than seniors just received.Those added cost will be passed on to the consumers taking another bite of seniors' shrinking income.
And as for saving up in an RRSP, well in the fifties the average wage was $2,127 per year meaning that you earned a grand total of $21,270 for the whole decade. Pretty hard to save the thousands need for retirement these days. The sixties were a bit better with the average being $3,679 or $36,790 for the whole decade. The seventies $6,789 per year or a total of $67,890 for the 10 year period. Better but still even the thriftiest would find it hard to save much.
As for having to support seniors, we are still paying school taxes even though it was almost fifties years since most of went to school and even our children have long ago graduated too. And now we must pay for your children not only to go to school but early learning and susitized daycare as well.
Obviously, there is a real cross-pollination of subsidies going on here, with seniors paying school taxes, the young paying to keep pension payments flowing etc. But there is little doubt that both the CPP And the OAS are both ponzi schemes perpetrated on both young and old, and it not only discourages but crowds out private savings, which was the real source of insurance decades ago.
Well, Bosco, these may be a type of ponzi schemes but what would you propose? As I pointed out, it is very difficult for individuals to save money when their wages are low compared to the inflated costs that they find when they reach retirement age. I guess we could eliminate all government pensions and go back to the type of conditions that existed in the industrialized world of the eighteen hundreds where seniors who were not wealthy had to either keep working until they were no longer able and then went to live with relatives, if they could, or ended up dying in poor houses. I had a great-grandfather who died on the job at the age of 82 because he was unable to save for retirement as well as raising a family.
While you are at it, why not eliminate all government subsidies to all families, children, the disabled etc. as well. As Scrooge said: "are there no prisons? are there no workhouses?"
You seem keenly aware that governments don't do much, if anything, well. I don't think they are any better at providing security for people in their old age. And that is why so many people must supplement their government pensions with quasi private retirement plans. But ultimately (unintended?) consequences of a government planned retirement are a disincentive to save during ones younger years, and a siphoning of earnings during this same period. Private alternatives, including an increased reliance on the family, as it once was, are not perfect solutions but I think that even with their flaws, they afford older people with more options, and the dignity they deserve. And yes, I would replace other subsidies and benefits with private charity, for much of the same reasons.
Post a Comment
<< Home