Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community
Old 01-08-2011, 02:42 PM   #1
onetwo_threefour
Powerplay Quarterback
 
onetwo_threefour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Mahogany, aka halfway to Lethbridge
Exp:
Default Email regarding Bill C428 - Amendments to OAS

Did a search and didn't find anything so apologies if this is a Fata.

I got an email last night that struck me as interesting on a couple of levels. On the one hand the actual content of the Bill being discussed in the email, but secondly, the nature of these political emails forwarded to hundreds of people that I seem to get from people all the time now. I thought this might raise an interesting discussion on either or both issues, so I have copied the email below removing the identifying info.

The Billl itself proposes an amendment to the Old Age Security pension allowing immigrants to qualify for pensions with only 3 years of Canadian residency instead of the current 10. The tone of the email is quite clear in what the author thinks about this proposal. I have my own thoughts and sent a lengthy reply back but I was curious as to other people's responses to this type of email and whether you get this type of political communication in your inbox and how you respond to this type of thing.


Quote:
Originally Posted by The Email
More on Bill C-428. I think it's time to make sure this bill does not go through! Join me and write your MP!


----- Forwarded Message ----
From: <deleted>
To: <deleted>
Sent: Fri, January 7, 2011 2:31:49 PM
Subject: Fw: Bill #C-428 - Old Age Pension Reform


Hi Where does it end. What´s next... Norval & Ann..

--- On Thu, 1/6/11, <deleted> wrote:
Date: Thursday, January 6, 2011, 6:29 PM


I totally disagree, something has to be done!!!!!
If this doesn't affect you..it will sooner or later. Please pass on to those who fall into this category.

Please read and hopefully follow thro'
Dear Ms. Consul:

I am pleased to respond to your electronic message, which was forwarded to me by the Office of the Prime Minister, the Right Honourable Stephen Harper, regarding private member's Bill C-428.

As you know, Bill C-428 proposes to amend the Old Age Security Act to reduce the residence requirement for entitlement to a monthly pension from ten years to three years. This private member's bill was introduced in the House of Commons by M..P. Ruby Dhalla, a Liberal Opposition Member.

As the Minister responsible, I have been very clear that when this Bill comes forward we will strongly oppose it.

The Old Age Security (OAS) pension is paid to seniors in recognition of the contribution that they have made to Canadian society, the economy, and their community. The OAS program is non-contributory and is based solely on age and residence in Canada after the age of 18. The ten-year residence rule is consistent with many other countries that have residence or contribution requirements associated with their national pensions to ensure that benefits are given in proportion to years of residence or affiliation with their pension programs. With this in mind, it is felt that the current ten-year residence requirement represents a balance between a reasonable contribution to Canadian society and the right to receive a lifelong pension.

It is estimated that reducing the ten-year eligibility requirement to three years would cost over $700 million annually in additional OAS and Guaranteed Income Supplement benefits. Given that the OAS program is funded entirely from general tax revenues, this would be costly and place an additional burden on the Canadian taxpayer..
Yours sincerely,
The Hon. Diane Finley, P.C., M.P.
Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development


Bill #C-428 [THANKS TO RUBY DHALLA AND BOB RAE]
Only if you disagree with this Bill ... pass this message along.


This bill should not have seen the light of day ... and yet it will receive second reading at the next sitting of parliament.

Please read the bill and make your own decision. If you disagree with the bill send this to everyone over the age of 50 in your address book ... or those who may be turning 50 a few years.

Hopefully, by letting your member of parliament know your feelings on the bill, it will be defeated..

If you agree with the bill you don't need to do anything..

URGENT ATTENTION About Our OAS pensions Bill C-428 An Act to Amend the Old Age Security Act (residency requirements)



Bill C-428 will allow recent immigrants to apply for OAS in 3 years instead of the existing 10.


This bill had first reading in the house on June 18, 2009.It was seconded by Bob Rae! MP Ms Ruby Dhalla who introduced the bill represents the riding of Brampton whose population is mainly East Indian.Right now you have to have lived in Canada for 10 years in order to qualify for Old Age Security. She wants the time reduced to 3 years. Thousands could come to Canada when they are 62 years old, never having worked or contributed to this country's tax system, etc and qualify for full Old Age Security benefits. 10 years minimum is reasonable - 3 is not!

Look this up, Google C-428 and you will see this bill has only one purpose, and that is to 'featherbed' a select group of people for votes.

I certainly hope this bill does not get passed. It is about time we called our elected MP's to ask them to NOT support this bill. Their response may be one factor in helping us determine who gets elected in the next election.

What Can You Do?

1. Spread the message to family, friends and e-mail buds.

2. Write letters, send e-mails to all your list and call Members of Parliament

It is time Canada looked after it's vets and long-term citizens before tossing OUR hard-earned money around on people who have no right to this money, never having paid taxes or contributed to our economy. If a family wishes to bring elderly relatives here and are willing to waive their own right to collect these funds in order that the elderly relatives can receive them ... fine. Otherwise, do not expect the Canadian taxpayers to do it.




There are too many people abusing the generosity of the Canadian people.. We need to stop this NOW. We, our children and our grand children currently owe the global investment community over $500 billion dollars ... the sum of our accumulated National Debt that is never publicized.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Now READ THIS..

Canada Pensions...
Only in Canada
* It is interesting to know that the federal Government of Canada allows :


  • <LI style="COLOR: black" class=yiv500669224MsoNormal>A monthly pension of : $1,890.00 to a simple refugee
  • plus : 580.00 in social aid
==========
  • A grand total of : $2,470.00 monthly
X 12 months
==========
$28,920.00 annual income






·By comparison, the Old Age Pension of a senior citizen who has contributed to the development of Our Beautiful Big Country during 40 or 50 years, CANNOT receive more than :
  • Amount/month $1,012.00 in Old Age Pension and Guaranteed Income Supplement
X 12 months
============





$12,144.00 annual income
  • A difference of : $16,776.00 per year
* Perhaps our senior citizens should ask for the Status of Refugees instead of applying for Old Age Pension.

* Let us send this message to as many Canadians as possible, and maybe the allowance of refugee could then be reduced to $1,012.00, and that of our Canadian pensioners raised to $2,470.00 per month. (who actually deserve it) the money that they have been paying in income taxes for 40 or 50 years,

AN INCREDIBLE NONSENSE !!!
OUR CANADIAN SENIORS CITIZENS, DESERVE BETTER
Please circulate this text to see the reaction of your contacts !
I did a little looking into this and there is an interesting discussion here:

http://www.rabble.ca/babble/canadian...ics/bill-c-428

that I think provides a bit more context to the discussion. To some degree I'm interested in what people actually think about the Bill itself, but I think the actual form of communication and this new kind of political discourse, the 'political chain letter email', is an equally compelling topic for discussion.

__________________
onetwo and threefour... Together no more. The end of an era. Let's rebuild...
onetwo_threefour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2011, 03:12 PM   #2
pylon
NOT Chris Butler
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Vote Threeve!
Exp:
Default

I hate chain emails, however, it the content is true on this one.... it makes me want to puke.
pylon is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to pylon For This Useful Post:
Old 01-08-2011, 03:31 PM   #3
onetwo_threefour
Powerplay Quarterback
 
onetwo_threefour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Mahogany, aka halfway to Lethbridge
Exp:
Default

The content is true... as far as it goes.

The problem is that there is a very one-sided presentation here. While the stated amendments to the OAS plan are correct, the stated rationale behind the amendments is at least somewhat questionable.

Apparently, there are some immigrant segments who are already entitled to apply after 3 years rather than 10.

It looks as though the actual costs are being vastly overstated in the email and maybe as little as 1/100th of what as suggested, although it may be as much as 1/10th. If it is 1/100th, this apparently represents about 1% of the entire budget of OAS.

There is some pretty overt racialization in the email with terms like "EAST INDIAN" capitalized and underscored in several locations.

The email fails to mention that PC MP Gurmant Grewal had previously proposed a similar amendment.

There are many different aspects to not only the content of this email but also with how the message is being communicated IMO. I think that these chain emails are dangerous because the shock value combined with the lack of fact-checking by the author gets people to have the kind of visceral response that you expressed pylon and I wonder of people have a tendency to pass something like this along because of that gut reaction without looking into it more deeply.

The reason I actually brought this up was because it was my dad who sent this email and it is his comment at the very beginning about writing your MP. My dad has lived in SW Ontario since birth and is normally center/center-left in most regards. I found it surprising that he had such a quick response and strong response based on his politics as I know them. I think a lot of it had to do with the way the email was constructed rather than the policy issue itself.

ETA: BTW, I'm not in any way saying that vote-buying and electioneering plays no part in the proposal, I'm not that naive. However, the complete failure to acknowledge that there is any other side to the argument is what I am looking at.
__________________
onetwo and threefour... Together no more. The end of an era. Let's rebuild...

Last edited by onetwo_threefour; 01-08-2011 at 03:34 PM.
onetwo_threefour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2011, 04:34 PM   #4
Hanni
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Hanni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: the angry dome
Exp:
Default

The real question to me is why are we taking in immigrants that are already at retirement age or close to it? Do we really want people coming to Canada who are going to contribute for a very short time (or not at all) and then collect from the system? I know I've heard that a lot of it is people becoming citizens and then sponsoring their parents to come here.

Issues with the refugee system and OAS being as low as it is are separate. If someone is a legitimate refugee then surely it doesn't matter what age they are.
Hanni is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2011, 04:58 PM   #5
amorak
Lifetime Suspension
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: 51.04177 -114.19704
Exp:
Default

I have written my MP about this issue. Taking in immigrants over 40/45 is a net drain on our society. Australia makes it nearly impossible for an over 40 to get in, and I suggest we do the same ASAP.
amorak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2011, 05:20 PM   #6
onetwo_threefour
Powerplay Quarterback
 
onetwo_threefour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Mahogany, aka halfway to Lethbridge
Exp:
Default

I question the truth of the assertion that older immigrants are a net drain on society. A good majority of immigrants are only accepted if they meet minimum financial criteria and most of those invest those financial means and pay income tax on the revenue generated. That revenue continues to be generated even past the age of 65 so the income tax coffers are being replenished by these older immigrants even as they are drawing on the pensions. Furthermore, the pensions are prorated by the number of years of residency (to my understanding) such that an older immigrant will not receive the same pension dollars as one who has emigrated much earlier.


This is what I meant about the subtleties of the argumant being lost in these types of emails that are flying around these days. I find them akin to election attack ads in how poorly they present more than one side of an argumant and they reactions they intend to provoke.

By the way, I'm not advocating for this Bill. Even having looked into it a bit I still feel uninformed and don't have a firm position.
__________________
onetwo and threefour... Together no more. The end of an era. Let's rebuild...
onetwo_threefour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2011, 06:11 PM   #7
Azure
Had an idea!
 
Azure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Exp:
Default

There is absolutely nothing wrong with accepting immigrants over the age of 40 if they meet certain requirements. Financial independence is one of the most important ones.

There are a variety of quality jobs a 40 year old person can old that if added to the Canadian economy will result in a net benefit for everyone.

Say he retires at 65, that is 15 years of work he can provide, and 15 years of paying taxes. Provided he makes a higher standard of living than most people, that is 15 years of paying more taxes than most.

We need to be tough on accepting immigrants that are only a drain on our social services, but make it easier for people with higher education, etc, etc to come work in our country.
Azure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2011, 07:02 PM   #8
Hanni
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Hanni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: the angry dome
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure View Post
There is absolutely nothing wrong with accepting immigrants over the age of 40 if they meet certain requirements. Financial independence is one of the most important ones.

There are a variety of quality jobs a 40 year old person can old that if added to the Canadian economy will result in a net benefit for everyone.

Say he retires at 65, that is 15 years of work he can provide, and 15 years of paying taxes. Provided he makes a higher standard of living than most people, that is 15 years of paying more taxes than most.

We need to be tough on accepting immigrants that are only a drain on our social services, but make it easier for people with higher education, etc, etc to come work in our country.
Couldn't agree more, you hear way to many stories of qualified people doing menial work because it is so hard to get certified in their field because they are trained abroad.

Don't get me wrong, obviously we need to ensure that someone with a medical degree, for example, is qualified to practice by Canadian standards. But it seems like we don't do enough to help the truly qualified ones along.
Hanni is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2011, 12:49 AM   #9
Rathji
Franchise Player
 
Rathji's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Supporting Urban Sprawl
Exp:
Default

People who meet immigration requirements are not a drain, but people who are here on refugee basis could very well be. The problem is that even if people are highly trained etc, they often can't work as anything but a service or menial labour job.

I have worked in a field with a large number of immigrants and refugees and despite the training, there are a very large percentage of people doing work that is far beneath their educational level. I am referring to professionals such as doctors, engineers, pharmacists etc working in a meat packing plant simply because the hoops they need to jump through to get 'certified' to work in Canada would leave them and their family destitute for a period of many years.

There needs to be some sort of finance program, either loans or grants for people like this to live while they are getting re-certified. I know they decided to move here etc but if we really want productive people coming through immigration then it is probably the best way.
__________________
"Wake up, Luigi! The only time plumbers sleep on the job is when we're working by the hour."
Rathji is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Rathji For This Useful Post:
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:00 PM.

Calgary Flames
2014-15
CP Chat!

CPRadio

2014-15 Regular Season:





Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2009