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

[#-3]

I really dislike the framing of the poll, because I think temperamentally I'm a pretty conservative person, and I don't see an ounce of conservatism in the modern right wing movement.

I'd love to see a party that fosters social infrastructure in an economically responsible way, with an eye towards reducing overall cost now and in the future. I'd love to see a party that is focused on protecting our institutions rather than trying to rip them down like the cons, trying to skirt them like the libs, or just hopelessly bashing the idea of them without better suggestions like the Dems. I'd love to see a party that wants to protect our our resources in a sustainable way. But right now we have me first and them gimmie gimmies running the movement, and just isn't conservativism, they don't give a crap if they ruin our pension in the future, as long as it is marginally better for the next 10 years until their turn over their caucus and by then they can blame the old guy anyways.

So I voted not a con and don't support.

[#-3]

Originally Posted by lazypucker

I am geniunely curious on how the CPP works.

Are there any fund managers investing and growing the money in the plan? Or is it just using young taxpayers' money to pay the old retirees?

https://www.cppinvestments.com/the-f...annual-report/

The info is public domain.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

With returns like that, it's too bad there isn't a "manged by CPP" ETF Canadians could invest in. Far better for most than gambling in the stock market, or using some schisty "broker" who does what their name says for you.

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Been there, lost that. Not something I'd recommend to anyone. Particularly knowing what I know now about them. Did you miss my "broker" quip?

Oh I got it, and it’s hilarious. I just think the entire sector gets a bad rap because of some bad actors.

[Amethyst]

I think an Alberta Pension Plan is an absolutely horrible idea. The CPP is well run and it's always better to have a bigger pool.

I 100% don't trust the UCP about anything. I especially don't trust them to run an APP at arms' length. I think they are pushing this for one of two reasons. 1) They want to use the money to fund their pet projects and supporters and don't give a #### about Albertans in general. 2) They know that it isn't possible and are using this to push for separation or inflame the Alberta vs Canada rhetoric even more. (Can they seriously stop doing this? I don't care what parties are involved, I want governments to work together, not waste time and resources complaining.)

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Amethyst

I think an Alberta Pension Plan is an absolutely horrible idea. The CPP is well run and it's always better to have a bigger pool.

I 100% don't trust the UCP about anything. I especially don't trust them to run an APP at arms' length. I think they are pushing this for one of two reasons. 1) They want to use the money to fund their pet projects and supporters and don't give a #### about Albertans in general. 2) They know that it isn't possible and are using this to push for separation or inflame the Alberta vs Canada rhetoric even more. (Can they seriously stop doing this? I don't care what parties are involved, I want governments to work together, not waste time and resources complaining.)

A bigger Heritage Fund to pilfer.

[Geraldsh]

I voted as a conservative not wanting an APP .
I am conservative; the UCP is not!

[OldDutch]

This poll is a microchasm of Canada. Lots of loud self righteous voices, yet the results Don't match the comments. Lots of folks going to be shocked and upset next election.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by OldDutch

This poll is a microchasm of Canada. Lots of loud self righteous voices, yet the results Don't match the comments. Lots of folks going to be shocked and upset next election.

They don't? In this thread the comments are universally against the APP and right now the vote is 106-7 against it. Seems pretty consistent to me.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Jacks

Well in that case you wouldn't consider yourself a Conservative right?
Pretty easy then to pick one of the 3rd or 4th options.

The idea was to get a sample of people who were more likely to support the UCP.

Despite popular belief the definitions of liberal and conservative are very subjective.

[Sainters7]

I'm definitely nervous about this. As is my staunch lifer Conservative father approaching retirement, he's not happy at all. Really hoping this goes sideways before it can happen...

[GGG]

Using Toombes numbers a max contributor would save $500 per year assuming equal returns and constant benefits. Employers would also save this amount. So about 14%.

Essentially it’s a bet in the oil industry. If it continues to outperform the rest of the Canadian economy then Alberta will have strong in migration and are better off with an APP. If it doesn’t then we are likely better off in CPP. I bet enough of my assets on oil is like to keep things separate

I also don’t trust Albertans to think long term. We continuously choose short term tax breaks / spending over saving. When Prentice asked us to look in the mirror we booted him. A PST would be political suicide despite the fact that having one would have enabled us not to be reliant on oil by now. In general we chose short term prosperity over long. We are not a group of voters who should be in charge of a defined benefit pension plan.

So for $500 per year it’s not worth risking the final backstop of my retirement. The only piece with zero longevity risk. So independent of the government in power I am against the APP.

[GGG]

Any of the pro APP posters want to share which set of numbers they believe, why they select that dataset and why that leads them to prefer an APP?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Despite popular belief the definitions of liberal and conservative are very subjective.

You have used a small ‘C’ not a large ‘C’ like in the poll.

[blankall]

The younger and harder working argument isn't that great. CPP isn't an automatic entitlement. What you get is based on what each individual put in.

I mean sure a younger population has more people paying in now, but the people collecting paid into it their entire lives. Eventually the people paying in now will collect their fair share, based on what they paid in.

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by blankall

The younger and harder working argument isn't that great. CPP isn't an automatic entitlement. What you get is based on what each individual put in.

I mean sure a younger population has more people paying in now, but the people collecting paid into it their entire lives. Eventually the people paying in now will collect their fair share, based on what they paid in.

Did the original post not cover that?

[Azure]

This is being framed as as 'we don't like the feds' issue. So lets play that game.

Don't like the feds.
Think the feds are screwing Alberta over.
Think the Liberals are morons.
Think the BoC has been acting like a drunk kid on crack.
Think the entire economic outlook for Canada is dog####.
Think other provinces are happy milking the Alberta Advantage.
Etc
Etc
Etc

But.

CPP is well run. Well designed. Results are there, have been there across multiple governments. They have managed their way through recessions, austerity, stupid government spending, on and on and on. Oh, and they have had the balls to look ahead 20-30 years and realize gotta pay more in to get the program healthy.

Why, why, why would ANYONE look at it as ANYTHING but a massive success, and especially these days a major bright spot for Canada.

[Fuzz]

A better question is "why would anyone who voted for Smith be surprised and disappointed she is doing this?"

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by GGG

I also don’t trust Albertans to think long term. We continuously choose short term tax breaks / spending over saving. When Prentice asked us to look in the mirror we booted him. A PST would be political suicide despite the fact that having one would have enabled us not to be reliant on oil by now. In general we chose short term prosperity over long. We are not a group of voters who should be in charge of a defined benefit pension plan.

A substantial number of people living (and voting) in Albertan are just here to make money during their peak earning years, and then return to elsewhere in Canada when the energy industry declines, or to retire. They don’t concern themselves with the strength of public health care or education in the province 30 or 40 years down the road. In that light, it’s understandable that maximizing their take-home pay here and now is their overriding political concern.

So no, I don’t trust voters in this province to make wise long-term decisions.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

A substantial number of people living (and voting) in Albertan are just here to make money during their peak earning years, and then return to elsewhere in Canada when the energy industry declines, or to retire. They don’t concern themselves with the strength of public health care or education in the province 30 or 40 years down the road. In that light, it’s understandable that maximizing their take-home pay here and now is their overriding political concern.

So no, I don’t trust voters in this province to make wise long-term decisions.

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?

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by blankall

The younger and harder working argument isn't that great. CPP isn't an automatic entitlement. What you get is based on what each individual put in.

I mean sure a younger population has more people paying in now, but the people collecting paid into it their entire lives. Eventually the people paying in now will collect their fair share, based on what they paid in.

I voted no switch. But the people collecting now didn't pay their fair share. Every contribution year before the changes in the '90s someone is collecting on they underpaid.

Edited to add: that's why the argument that Alberta's population could age doesn't make any difference. It isn't that younger is necessarily better going forward. It's that the ratio of people paying their share plus a bit extra now to the people who didn't cover their share before the 90s changes is higher.

The "unfairness" in the system isn't geographic, it's generational.