Do you support leaving the CPP and creating a new Alberta Pension Plan?

[GordonBlue]

I didn't vote as I hated the poll options. should have left out the conservative bit. It's pretty simple you either support the APP or don't.

I hate even the idea of the APP. Sheer stupidity.

[Yeah_Baby]

I'm not conservative (shocker, right?) and I don't support an APP.

But on the other hand it's not like Milennials and those behind us will get to retire anyway so maybe it's all moot.

[Robbob]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

I didn't vote as I hated the poll options. should have left out the conservative bit. It's pretty simple you either support the APP or don't.

I hate even the idea of the APP. Sheer stupidity.

Yeah, I didn't like the poll options. I would say I lean conservative, but not these ones.

[Red Slinger]

Originally Posted by Sliver

Good point. It's also such a problem with democracies in general. How do you compel somebody to vote for the best interests of the collective versus their own self interests? Unfortunately, you can't, but how cool would it be if you could?

I think this is one of the biggest issues with regionalism within a larger state. People that put Alberta first (or BC or Texas or Chihuahua, etc.) are ultimately not helping anyone except for the cynical self-interested, short-term profiteers that prey on people's irrational fears.

[PepsiFree]

The poll options are fine, as it’s whether you identify as a Conservative or not. The “not” doesn’t mean you don’t vote Conservative, it means you don’t attach your identity to that party. When there are people (like Yoho here, for example) whose entire identity is wrapped in their political affiliation and doesn’t extend beyond that, it’s a valid distinction. You might lean conservative, you might hold some traditionally conservative values, but you might not identify as a big C Conservative. So, you would choose “not.”

[Tron_fdc]

Hmmmm I kind of read it in the sense that it's "conservative" and not "UCP" because those two things are not the same. At least not to me, anyway.

Doesn't really matter though, because it looks like 90% don't support it regardless of their political leanings.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Tron_fdc

Hmmmm I kind of read it in the sense that it's "conservative" and not "UCP" because those two things are not the same. At least not to me, anyway.

Doesn't really matter though, because it looks like 90% don't support it regardless of their political leanings.

This is kind of the root of the problem. It has kind of become the same. All these right parties are going bat#### loony.

[Doctorfever]

Originally Posted by Yeah_Baby

I'm not conservative (shocker, right?) and I don't support an APP.

But on the other hand it's not like Milennials and those behind us will get to retire anyway so maybe it's all moot.

Kinda touched on this a while ago. If Millennials and those behind won’t be able to retire, would you support some changes in order to help them in the future? Like raising the age from 65 to 67?

I am not 100% sure I support it, on the surface it seemed like a decent idea.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by Yeah_Baby

I'm not conservative (shocker, right?) and I don't support an APP.

But on the other hand it's not like Milennials and those behind us will get to retire anyway so maybe it's all moot.

When Boomers die there is going to be a massive transfer of wealth to Miliennials and Gen x. Trouble is that is still a decade away. Gen Z and younger will need to wait another 40 years before it gets transferred again.

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by Tron_fdc

Hmmmm I kind of read it in the sense that it's "conservative" and not "UCP" because those two things are not the same. At least not to me, anyway.

Doesn't really matter though, because it looks like 90% don't support it regardless of their political leanings.

Yeah that was my interpretation as well, I selected "I consider myself Conservative" even though I don't like any of the current Conservative parties in Canada

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

When Boomers die there is going to be a massive transfer of wealth to Miliennials and Gen x. Trouble is that is still a decade away. Gen Z and younger will need to wait another 40 years before it gets transferred again.

Yeah, a lot of retirements are going to be funded by people receiving fat inheritances in their 50s.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Yeah, a lot of retirements are going to be funded by people receiving fat inheritances in their 50s.

While I agree with this, the reality is that a lot of that money is already spent. I just have anecdotal evidence on that, but when you realise the amount of debt and spending that people are partaking in, you have a pretty solid view of where those funds ultimately end up.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by Slava

While I agree with this, the reality is that a lot of that money is already spent. I just have anecdotal evidence on that, but when you realise the amount of debt and spending that people are partaking in, you have a pretty solid view of where those funds ultimately end up.

There is also a massive tax that comes with it, and I wouldn't be surprised if it is made more robust still.

[CliffFletcher]

Are there really lots of Canadians in their 80s who have taken big loans against the value of their homes?

Maybe it’s a generational thing, but my parents and their cohort seem pretty careful about their money. Then again, they finished paying off their mortgages in their early 50s. That might not be the case with Canadians who are in their 60s now.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Are there really lots of Canadians in their 80s who have taken big loans against the value of their homes?

Maybe it’s a generational thing, but my parents and their cohort seem pretty careful about their money. Then again, they paid off their mortgages in their 50s. That might not be the case with people who are in their 60s now.

I think it's split even within the generation. Coming of professional age in the 70's vs the late 80's and early 90's would result in a pretty different outlook on money.

In the 70's we were all doomed, and in the 90's money machine go brrrr.

[aaronck]

Besides being totally unpopular for the most part, how many tax dollars are going to be funneled into this boondoggle? No idea of the NDP figure of 7.5 million is correct, but it certainly won't be free, just as kenney's fight against the equalization formula referendum wasn't. Which UCP donor has an ad agency that is getting all this work? I assume they also receive the majority of the FOIP exempt War Room advertising budget as well.

It's like the UCP are willing to spend taxpayer dollars on just about anything except things Albertans need like healthcare, education etc.

https://edmontonjournal.com/news/pol...an-ad-campaign

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

There is also a massive tax that comes with it, and I wouldn't be surprised if it is made more robust still.

What tax is that?
I presume if there is money in an RRSP that would be taxed when that is withdrawn/inherited, but what else would get taxed?

As far as I know there is no inheritance tax in Canada.

[Sainters7]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Yeah, a lot of retirements are going to be funded by people receiving fat inheritances in their 50s.

Knowing my parents, my sister and I are probably just going to get issued a bill when our parents go..

[Lubicon]

I'm generally a small 'c' conservative and don't support our current provincial government. But I voted for the second option as that seemed closest to making the point that not all conservatives support an APP.

[powderjunkie]

I have to chuckle at the posters taking issue with the poll question framing. It seems like people are uncomfortable identifying as conservatives while also being uncomfortable identifying themselves as anything but a conservative. Such a weird Albertan complex.