Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Go Back   Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community > Main Forums > The Off Topic Forum
Register Forum Rules FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-27-2012, 09:28 AM   #81
valo403
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by darklord700 View Post
I can point out many other countries without OAS and their seniors didn't suffer.
Can you also point out the social systems in place that create this result while you're at it?

You're acting as if the absence of an OAS type system hasn't been remedied through other means. By all means question the effectiveness of any particular method, but don't act like you just eliminate the whole concept altogether without dire consequences for a significant part of the population.
__________________
When you do a signature and don't attribute it to anyone, it's yours. - Vulcan
valo403 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2012, 09:36 AM   #82
darklord700
First Line Centre
 
darklord700's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by valo403 View Post
You're acting as if the absence of an OAS type system hasn't been remedied through other means. By all means question the effectiveness of any particular method, but don't act like you just eliminate the whole concept altogether without dire consequences for a significant part of the population.
Of course eliminating OAS at this point would cause dire consequences to some people who are counting on it. The argument that if Canada never had OAS ever many seniors would be living on the streets today. This is simple not true.

It's like saying if we never had universal health care, many people today will die from sickness.

I'm more interested in arguing if giving out money to seniors by and large based on age, that causes the country to go into debt, is a good thing to the society.
darklord700 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2012, 09:43 AM   #83
valo403
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by darklord700 View Post
Of course eliminating OAS at this point would cause dire consequences to some people who are counting on it. The argument that if Canada never had OAS ever many seniors would be living on the streets today. This is simple not true.

It's like saying if we never had universal health care, many people today will die from sickness.

I'm more interested in arguing if giving out money to seniors by and large based on age, that causes the country to go into debt, is a good thing to the society.
I don't get the point of your first two paragraphs. Canada has OAS, so either you're arguing for time travel or you're really not making much of a point at all.

It's great that other countries operate in a different manner, congrats to them, but you're completely dismissing the fact that the social systems they have in place to achieve a result come with costs as well. It's not like you can dispose of OAS, implement a system to achieve the same results in terms of standard of living, and come out without spending a dime.

I haven't gone through the whole thread, so maybe you already argued this, but pointing at countries that don't have an OAS type system as if it's proof of something totally misses the issue.
__________________
When you do a signature and don't attribute it to anyone, it's yours. - Vulcan
valo403 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2012, 09:52 AM   #84
Rathji
Franchise Player
 
Rathji's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Supporting Urban Sprawl
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by darklord700 View Post
Of course eliminating OAS at this point would cause dire consequences to some people who are counting on it. The argument that if Canada never had OAS ever many seniors would be living on the streets today. This is simple not true.

It's like saying if we never had universal health care, many people today will die from sickness.

I'm more interested in arguing if giving out money to seniors by and large based on age, that causes the country to go into debt, is a good thing to the society.
If I had the time, and I actually thought you would read them, I could point to a few studies on the social return on investment that show that investing money in people who would otherwise be destitute costs society far less than dealing with the consequences of them being destitute. It is actually to the order of several magnitudes.

I understand that you really just think these people any disadvantaged person should fend for themselves. I understand that you don't think the government should be spending money on them at all. However, the reality is, it wouldn't be cheaper in this case.
__________________
"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
Old 02-27-2012, 09:54 AM   #85
darklord700
First Line Centre
 
darklord700's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by valo403 View Post
I haven't gone through the whole thread, so maybe you already argued this, but pointing at countries that don't have an OAS type system as if it's proof of something totally misses the issue.
I'm not saying we should just drop OAS at this moment. But if the idea of OAS isn't such a good one and OAS crippling our country's finance, then maybe we should think about dropping it in the future.

The problem is that Canada being a welfare state, once you started handing out cash to people, it's hard to take it back.
darklord700 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2012, 09:56 AM   #86
Rathji
Franchise Player
 
Rathji's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Supporting Urban Sprawl
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by darklord700 View Post
i'm not saying we should just drop oas at this moment. But if the idea of oas isn't such a good one and oas crippling our country's finance, then maybe we should think about dropping it in the future.

The problem is that canada being a welfare state, once you realize how much it costs in other areas to not support these people, it actually makes sense to continue support.
fyp.
__________________
"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
Old 02-27-2012, 10:08 AM   #87
darklord700
First Line Centre
 
darklord700's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rathji View Post
I understand that you really just think these people any disadvantaged person should fend for themselves. I understand that you don't think the government should be spending money on them at all. However, the reality is, it wouldn't be cheaper in this case.
This has changed to be a more of a philosophical argument now. How many trust fund kids make anything out of their life and good fortunate? How about Ryan Jenkins who was born with a silver spoon ended up killing himself? I am not saying kids from wealthy families are not good but you get my drift.

I don't have a trust fund to my name so I have to study, work and contribute to the society. But if I had, I'm not sure I would have the same motivation to work hard. It's just human nature.

Many times you aren't really "helping" people by "helping" them. Say a senior couple with no savings and assets, living OAS to OAS in a tenement housing, is the social safety net really helping them?
darklord700 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2012, 10:13 AM   #88
valo403
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by darklord700 View Post
I'm not saying we should just drop OAS at this moment. But if the idea of OAS isn't such a good one and OAS crippling our country's finance, then maybe we should think about dropping it in the future.

The problem is that Canada being a welfare state, once you started handing out cash to people, it's hard to take it back.
And what do you replace it with?

You were so quick to point to out that there are countries without OAS type systems (oddly you didn't actually point any out), and yet you seem to be having a hell of a time coming up with an answer to the question of what social programs they utilize to avoid the disastrous result of having a largely destitute senior population.
__________________
When you do a signature and don't attribute it to anyone, it's yours. - Vulcan
valo403 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2012, 10:15 AM   #89
valo403
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by darklord700 View Post
This has changed to be a more of a philosophical argument now. How many trust fund kids make anything out of their life and good fortunate? How about Ryan Jenkins who was born with a silver spoon ended up killing himself? I am not saying kids from wealthy families are not good but you get my drift.

I don't have a trust fund to my name so I have to study, work and contribute to the society. But if I had, I'm not sure I would have the same motivation to work hard. It's just human nature.

Many times you aren't really "helping" people by "helping" them. Say a senior couple with no savings and assets, living OAS to OAS in a tenement housing, is the social safety net really helping them?
Did you seriously just attempt to make a comparison between OAS and people who are born into multi-million dollar trust funds?

You actually think these are comparable things?

__________________
When you do a signature and don't attribute it to anyone, it's yours. - Vulcan
valo403 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2012, 10:25 AM   #90
darklord700
First Line Centre
 
darklord700's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by valo403 View Post
You were so quick to point to out that there are countries without OAS type systems (oddly you didn't actually point any out), and yet you seem to be having a hell of a time coming up with an answer to the question of what social programs they utilize to avoid the disastrous result of having a largely destitute senior population.
Assuming we need a social program and I am not talking about disable people who can't work here, I would base it on income and assets. It would be more like CPP and not a free for all when you reached a certain age.

You work more, you contribute more and you get more back when you retire. If you choose not to work or not to save for your retirement, then I don't think the society owes you anything when you retire.

It might be a romantic idea to take care of "everybody", but I know some people cutting off financially their siblings, kids, or parents, just because they couldn't help anymore.

Last edited by darklord700; 02-27-2012 at 10:29 AM.
darklord700 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2012, 10:40 AM   #91
valo403
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by darklord700 View Post
Assuming we need a social program and I am not talking about disable people who can't work here, I would base it on income and assets. It would be more like CPP and not a free for all when you reached a certain age.

You work more, you contribute more and you get more back when you retire. If you choose not to work or not to save for your retirement, then I don't think the society owes you anything when you retire.

It might be a romantic idea to take care of "everybody", but I know some people cutting off financially their siblings, kids, or parents, just because they couldn't help anymore.
So basically you'd set it up so that those who don't need assistance would be the only ones eligible. Seems like a brilliant plan!!!
__________________
When you do a signature and don't attribute it to anyone, it's yours. - Vulcan
valo403 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2012, 10:49 AM   #92
Rathji
Franchise Player
 
Rathji's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Supporting Urban Sprawl
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by darklord700 View Post

Many times you aren't really "helping" people by "helping" them. Say a senior couple with no savings and assets, living OAS to OAS in a tenement housing, is the social safety net really helping them?
What does this even mean?

I know, they should go out and get some education so they can be productive in the work force. We should fund that instead. If they can't be productive and are living in squalor, we should stop giving them money, because it obviously isn't helping.

Am I reading that right?
__________________
"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
Old 02-27-2012, 10:52 AM   #93
darklord700
First Line Centre
 
darklord700's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rathji View Post
I know, they should go out and get some education so they can be productive in the work force. We should fund that instead. If they can't be productive and are living in squalor, we should stop giving them money, because it obviously isn't helping.
Which one is better, give people fish or teach people how to fish? This is a long running debate with no definitive answer. That's why we have the leftist and the rightist.
darklord700 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2012, 10:56 AM   #94
Azure
Had an idea!
 
Azure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rathji View Post
fyp.
Again, it depends which 'people' you're talking about. The poor and needy? I agree that we should help them to a point. But those that can fend for themselves should also save for themselves, and with time OAS should be restructured in a way where the poor and needy are the only ones that the program helps.

Given that we have already have a program that helps seniors when they retire, I don't think we need OAS at all. Phase one of them out, and restructure the other one to help those that fall into a certain income level.
Azure is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Azure For This Useful Post:
Old 02-27-2012, 10:58 AM   #95
Azure
Had an idea!
 
Azure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by darklord700 View Post
Which one is better, give people fish or teach people how to fish? This is a long running debate with no definitive answer. That's why we have the leftist and the rightist.
You do realize of course that there are certain people in society that are truly incapable of actually helping themselves, right?
Azure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2012, 10:59 AM   #96
Rathji
Franchise Player
 
Rathji's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Supporting Urban Sprawl
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by darklord700 View Post
Which one is better, give people fish or teach people how to fish? This is a long running debate with no definitive answer. That's why we have the leftist and the rightist.
Are you seriously suggesting that we should reeducate old people and make them productive in society in order to not have to pay OAS, and that somehow it would be more productive use of taxpayer dollars than OAS?
__________________
"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
Old 02-27-2012, 11:05 AM   #97
darklord700
First Line Centre
 
darklord700's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure View Post
You do realize of course that there are certain people in society that are truly incapable of actually helping themselves, right?
Of course there are but those people account for a very small percentage of the whole population. I agreed the disabled should be helped but that's not what the OAS is for. Most OAS recipients are not disabled and couldn't work in their prime.
darklord700 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2012, 11:13 AM   #98
valo403
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by darklord700 View Post
Of course there are but those people account for a very small percentage of the whole population. I agreed the disabled should be helped but that's not what the OAS is for. Most OAS recipients are not disabled and couldn't work in their prime.
You are awesome at avoiding actual hard questions.
__________________
When you do a signature and don't attribute it to anyone, it's yours. - Vulcan
valo403 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2012, 11:22 AM   #99
darklord700
First Line Centre
 
darklord700's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by valo403 View Post
You are awesome at avoiding actual hard questions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by valo403 View Post
So basically you'd set it up so that those who don't need assistance would be the only ones eligible. Seems like a brilliant plan!!!
If this is your hard question, then yes, I proposed a plan to reward hard work and excellence. Please don't sensationalist the debate by including disabled people. If you don't work when you can, the society doesn't owe you much when you can't work.
darklord700 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2012, 11:36 AM   #100
bizaro86
Franchise Player
 
bizaro86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rathji View Post
If I had the time, and I actually thought you would read them, I could point to a few studies on the social return on investment that show that investing money in people who would otherwise be destitute costs society far less than dealing with the consequences of them being destitute. It is actually to the order of several magnitudes.

I understand that you really just think these people any disadvantaged person should fend for themselves. I understand that you don't think the government should be spending money on them at all. However, the reality is, it wouldn't be cheaper in this case.
Giving money to people who would otherwise be destitute so they aren't is a good idea.

Out of curiousity, how much money would you have the gov't give a senior couple with equal incomes and a combined income of 130k per year? If I was picking, that amount would be zero. Right now they would get the full amount of OAS.

The cutoff before you stop getting any OAS is >100k per year for an individual. Now, I know CP's average income is greater than the Canadian average, but is anyone really in favour of direct income transfers to people making >100k per year? How can you possibly justify that?

Last edited by bizaro86; 02-27-2012 at 11:41 AM.
bizaro86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


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 03:47 AM.

Calgary Flames
2024-25




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021 | See Our Privacy Policy