Quote:
Originally Posted by darklord700
I don't disagree with that. However, if women in the boomer generation could survive and raise a family based on one income at that time, they should be able to do that based on one OAS/GIS when they retire.
I think it's fair that the boomer generation is a one income family, so they draw one OAS/GIS. The X generation is a two income family, so they draw two OAS/GIS. I know it's not going to be this precise but user pay should be the general idea when designing a tax or welfare system.
And I don't believe in free for all OAS/GIS. I know some seniors living with their families, have little to no expenses and they still got full OAS/GIS. What happen is that those OAS/GIS just became the inheritance to their children on eday. Is that what the system was designed for?
|
You seem to have a real disdain for the so called boomer generation. You also don't seem to place any value on the work done by the traditional homemaker. The first boomers entered the workforce in the mid sixties, so I would say that the majority of that generation's family units coming later were two income families anyway. It just sounds like a lot of resentment to me. The best thing to do is gradually lower the threshold for clawbacks, not arbitrarily cut off people (mostly women) because they had the gall to actually nurture their family.