[Public_Domain]

[BartSimpson]

Mr_Canada Mr_Canada:

Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels:

Modern Industry has converted the little workshop of the patriarchal master into the great factory of the industrial capitalist. Masses of labourers, crowded into the factory, are organised like soldiers. As privates of the industrial army they are placed under the command of a perfect hierarchy of officers and sergeants. Not only are they slaves of the bourgeois class, and of the bourgeois State; they are daily and hourly enslaved by the machine, by the overlooker, and, above all, by the individual bourgeois manufacturer himself. The more openly this despotism proclaims gain to be its end and aim, the more petty, the more hateful and the more embittering it is.

...

No sooner is the exploitation of the labourer by the manufacturer, so far, at an end, that he receives his wages in cash, than he is set upon by the other portions of the bourgeoisie, the landlord, the shopkeeper, the pawnbroker, etc.

Of course, living with your parents like you do you're immune to the harsh realities of the market and such menial drudgeries like earning a living.

Sarcasm aside, Marx and Engels replaced an oppressive capitalist system with murderous, cold, gray Communist systems.

As bad as freedom, the free markets, and capitalism may be they are still light years ahead of the alternatives.

[Public_Domain]

[OnTheIce]

andyt andyt:

That is the case. But they had actually wanted to raise EI rates even more, but because so many people aren't working they didn't want to create the drag on the economy. Of course they could just raise the corporate tax, but their corporate overlords won't let them.

You are aware that these corporations employ hundreds of thousands of people directly and indirectly?

You're also aware that our Government, and in turn, our investments (CPP, etc), rely heavily on corporations doing well?

So who cares if a few thousand of their employees hit the EI line.

Who cares of the companies falter and our investments dwindle.

All you see is corporations and profit. You're unable to see the big picture.

[BeaverFever]

Also note that the CPP max pensionable earnings increases because the retirement benefit also increases. Your CPP entitlement is a % of the YMPE, to a max of 25%.

Also new for 2012, if you postpone your retirement, the benefit increases by 0.7% for each month it is pospotponed, instead of 0.5% (the benefit for early retirement is decreased by 0.6% instead of 0.5% however).

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Caelon Caelon:

Shadow_Flanker Shadow_Flanker:

[huh] Correct me if I'm wrong here. But with less people working than before and more people taking their pensions, there is less being put into the EI and CPP funds, so to make up for the shortfall the gov needs to raise the rates to keep both EI and CPP programs afloat. If that is the case, the rate increase makes sense.

That is true more so for CPP than EI. To receive EI you must be part of the work force population and thus retirees do not have an impact.

Not entirely. Savvy retirees will "put off" their pensions for a year after they retire so they can collect EI. I personally know several people that have done just that including my father.

[Shadow_Flanker]

I remember a year or so ago watching a news program on CBC or CTV about the current and future look at government programs, specifically CPP. It mentioned that a few decades ago (when the baby boomers were all working) there were six workers for every one pensioneer, and as time went by and the boomers are now taking their pensions the analysts predicted there will be three workers for every one pensioneer. They mentioned if it does go that way programs like Social Security, and CPP would be greatly reduced in funds, endangering the pensions of the current workforce.

Has anyone else seen that program? I can't think of the name or when it aired. If any of you know of the program I'm talking about let me know.

[Yogi]

I adjust my rates ^^^^ every 6 mos, so that I stay a wee bit ahead of the Cost of Living increases and inevitable upward spiral of taxes.

[Proculation]

Mr_Canada Mr_Canada:

It's like a broken friggen record - I'm not going to bother re-writing the whole damn speel. Marx wasn't around when the revolution happened in the wrong country, that's all I'm going to bother with.

I suggest you a book I've read recently, Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy by Joseph Shumpeter. A grandiose book of reality. The first part is about socialism and Marx. He gets his butt kicked hard as being very simplistic and theoretical and pushing reality aside when it didn't fit his 'vision'. I guess it's very appealing to young people like you, who didn't feel any reality outside your parents' home.

[Proculation]

Shadow_Flanker Shadow_Flanker:

I remember a year or so ago watching a news program on CBC or CTV about the current and future look at government programs, specifically CPP. It mentioned that a few decades ago (when the baby boomers were all working) there were six workers for every one pensioneer, and as time went by and the boomers are now taking their pensions the analysts predicted there will be three workers for every one pensioneer. They mentioned if it does go that way programs like Social Security, and CPP would be greatly reduced in funds, endangering the pensions of the current workforce.

Has anyone else seen that program? I can't think of the name or when it aired. If any of you know of the program I'm talking about let me know.

CPP and other public pension plan are based on a Ponzi scheme. They were based on the assumption that there will always be people to pay for other's retirement. Unfortunately, it's not the case. The basic principle of a retirement plan is that you place money in a plan and use it, with the interests earned, when you retire. The public plans use today's money to pay for retirement of no longer working people. They made the assumption that non yet born people will pay for them. But, they made less children than their parents did so the scheme is crumbling. Like a Ponzi scheme.

I'm paying more than 10% of my paycheck to pay for retirees. Money that I could put into my OWN retirement plan. It is stolen to pay for mistakes made by the people in power now. It won't change until the baby boomers get off the map. I will loose hundred of thousands of dollars in the process tho.

[Public_Domain]

[Caelon]

Proculation Proculation:

CPP and other public pension plan are based on a Ponzi scheme. They were based on the assumption that there will always be people to pay for other's retirement. Unfortunately, it's not the case. The basic principle of a retirement plan is that you place money in a plan and use it, with the interests earned, when you retire. The public plans use today's money to pay for retirement of no longer working people. They made the assumption that non yet born people will pay for them. But, they made less children than their parents did so the scheme is crumbling. Like a Ponzi scheme.

I'm paying more than 10% of my paycheck to pay for retirees. Money that I could put into my OWN retirement plan. It is stolen to pay for mistakes made by the people in power now. It won't change until the baby boomers get off the map. I will loose hundred of thousands of dollars in the process tho.

That was true initially, but was revised when Paul Martin was Finance Minister. At the time the plan was essentially bankrupt and it would have been argueably cheaper to gradually eliminate it over time. That was not the political decision of the day and so we went on a program of ever increasing percentage of salary until the current 4.95% from the employee and 4.95% from the employer to the maximum income level. Self employed pay both halves. The plan is now described like.

$1:

The CPP is funded on a "steady-state" basis, with its current contribution rate set so that it will remain constant for the next 75 years, by accumulating a reserve fund sufficient to stabilize the asset/expenditure and funding ratios over time. Such a system is a hybrid between a fully funded one and a "pay-as-you-go" plan. In other words, assets held in the CPP fund are by themselves insufficient to pay for all future benefits accrued to date but sufficient to prevent contributions from rising any further. While a sustainable path for this particular plan, given the indefinite existence of a government, it is not typical of other public or private sector pension plans. A study [2] published in April 2007 by the CPP's chief actuary showed that this type of funding method is "robust and appropriate" given reasonable assumptions about future conditions. The chief actuary submits a report to Parliament every three years on the financial status of the plan.

In June 2011 the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board had $153.2 billion in assets under management.

[Caelon]

Shadow_Flanker Shadow_Flanker:

I remember a year or so ago watching a news program on CBC or CTV about the current and future look at government programs, specifically CPP. It mentioned that a few decades ago (when the baby boomers were all working) there were six workers for every one pensioneer, and as time went by and the boomers are now taking their pensions the analysts predicted there will be three workers for every one pensioneer. They mentioned if it does go that way programs like Social Security, and CPP would be greatly reduced in funds, endangering the pensions of the current workforce.

Has anyone else seen that program? I can't think of the name or when it aired. If any of you know of the program I'm talking about let me know.

I did a little googling and found this
http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/retirement/

$1:

In 1981, there were 4.6 million near-retirees (people between 45 and 64 years old) in Canada. They made up 27.8 per cent of the working-age population. By 2002, that number had grown to 7.6 million – or 35.7 per cent of the working-age population. By 2006, 8.7 million – or 38.8 per cent of the working-age population – will be close enough to the golden handshake to give it serious thought.

Workers per retired person
1991: 3.8
2001: 2.7
2011: 1.8 (projected)


According to the number crunchers at Statistics Canada, a third of them will conclude they haven't set aside enough to be able to afford to do it.

The MacDonald Laurier Institute pegged the current ration (2010) as 3.25 or better than the CBC number. I am not sure if they were just comparing the 20 to 64 age group (available workers) to the 65+ age group or were using actual numbers. There are a number of studies suggesting the ratio will be 2 workers or less sometime before 2050.

So can all the younger members on the forum please work harder, make more money and pay more taxes so the older forum members can continue to collect CPP and OAS to supplement their income.

[OnTheIce]

Proculation Proculation:

I'm paying more than 10% of my paycheck to pay for retirees. Money that I could put into my OWN retirement plan. It is stolen to pay for mistakes made by the people in power now. It won't change until the baby boomers get off the map. I will loose hundred of thousands of dollars in the process tho.

You shouldn't be.

If you're self-employed, you pay less than 10% (9.9% of pensionable earnings). If you're employed, you pay 4.95%.

In addition, the maximum contribution for 2011 is only $2217.60.

I'm in the process of doing taxes for my wife's business.

[EyeBrock]

Some of us pay 12% into our pension OTI.