# Spoiled Kids Rant



## Freedomeer (Jan 3, 2018)

I don't know how common this is. I had to bite my tongue for 5 days. We went to my wife's aunts' house for a visit this Easter, who have guardianship over their 13 year old grandson / grandnephew. I have never met a kid so spoiled and useless. And it probably isn't his fault. They do everything for him. Absolutely everything. Put toothpaste on his toothbrush and leave it by the sink to remind him. He had to ask his aunt to make him a plate when it was a pot luck, where his 6 year old cousin was happy making his own plate. 

Which the weekend led to this exchange:

Kid: "Aunt, I asked for an XBOX card for this Easter. There better be an XBOX card oh so help me. You F'ing better have gotten me one"

Aunt - just walks away and ignores it.

Next morning, XBox card. 

Me: "Are you going to thank your aunt for the card"

No response. 

It was his brother's birthday that weekend. He went through the card beforehand, counted the money and was pissed at how much money the grandma was giving his brother. 

And god know how many more such exchanged. I almost want to volunteer to take the kid for a couple months this summer to show him to work and responsibility and how a man should behave , but it would probably not amount to much.

If people complain about the Millennial Generation (Which I am in the front end of)....just you wait! We are completely F'd when the next one comes. 

Hopefully he is the exception, but when seeing people with their kids, I am guessing not so much.

Sorry for the rant. Just frustrating


----------



## Daniel A. (Mar 20, 2011)

Your right it isn't his fault and there is much more going on than you see, the fact that someone else has guardianship of this kid say's something very wrong was going on. Sounds like its going to take a lot of work to change this and figure out the best way forward.


----------



## redsgomarching (Mar 6, 2016)

there are no such thing as bad students....only bad teachers.


----------



## Userkare (Nov 17, 2014)

Freedomeer said:


> If people complain about the Millennial Generation (Which I am in the front end of)....just you wait! We are completely F'd when the next one comes.
> 
> Hopefully he is the exception, but when seeing people with their kids, I am guessing not so much.


Lately, seeing those teens from the Parkland, FL school where the shootings occurred, has given me some hope. They speak so well and eloquently, not saying 'like' or 'ahhh' every other word. Even under all the stress they suffered, and at public speaking events, they seem to be holding it together. Whether you agree with their message or not, you have to admit these kids are no worthless sluggards. I hope the future is with kids like that.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

I know every generation likes to complain about the next one coming up. Fortunately, even though every generation has its share of the kids you describe, it also has a bunch of responsible, respectable kids which no one talks about because they aren't the extreme cases which stand out. 

As with the kids of every generation, the one you describe will eventually have to face reality. How he responds is anyone's guess but most usually have to deal with reality at some point...or they remain in the basement for the rest of their lives.


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

redsgomarching said:


> there are no such thing as bad students....only bad teachers.


^ Statement detached from reality.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

Tough to fix someone who is already 13 years old.

Maybe they should put him into air cadets or something.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

I think people put too much stock in the concept of generations. There has always been useless, awful people with bad upbringing. We didn't just invent it.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

new dog said:


> Tough to fix someone who is already 13 years old.
> 
> Maybe they should put him into air cadets or something.


And then we wonder that Canadians have so much debt


----------



## Freedomeer (Jan 3, 2018)

new dog said:


> Tough to fix someone who is already 13 years old.
> 
> Maybe they should put him into air cadets or something.


I feel the 13 year old can be changed. He has a moral compass. You can tell when he feels bad about something. The people that need to change are the guardians. If you think it is tough fixing a 13 year old, try a 50 year old! You can't take all responsibility from someone and then expect something of them. Nor should there be free money, without work. That is gonna bite him in the *** come 18. When we wanted something growing up, my parents asked how we were going to get it...paper routes, baby sitting, lawn mowing, shoveling, dog walking, building bird houses...you name it. But when we got the N64, we loved it because we earned it. It was worth far more to us just because we got it with our effort. Where friends who were given one, liked it for a week, and then never touched it again. 

We were trying to talk to the guardians about responsibility and how they should read 12 Rules for Life by Jordan Peterson. But that fell on deaf ears. I will still probably send them the book.


----------



## redsgomarching (Mar 6, 2016)

OnlyMyOpinion said:


> ^ Statement detached from reality.


im not talking about just pure teachers only i am talking about society. ever look around? drive around a neighbourhood? human decency and behaviour has been on a constant decline it is so appalling. it is no wonder that kids like this are springing up everywhere. 

kids mimic adults. yes there is a certain point that can determine if a student is off their rocker completely, but that means as adults we must work harder to ensure they learn and this is not being done at all.


----------



## Synergy (Mar 18, 2013)

OnlyMyOpinion said:


> ^ Statement detached from reality.


Agreed. Seems like a load of BS to me. You can't put all the onus on society, parents, teachers, etc. Some kids have great parents, supportive environments, etc. and still take a turn for the worst. It's not uncommon to have two children in a family with very similar "nuture" and completely different outcomes. Some kids with shitty parenting, poor environments, etc. turn out great.


----------



## SW20 MR2 (Dec 18, 2010)

We are struggling a bit with our 8 year old. At times, he can be very lazy, entitled, and snarky. At other times, he's a sweet kid. At this age now, we're trying to teach him to be more self sufficient and trying to teach him more about the value of a buck.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

My opinion is that kids today are taught that they are effectively the center of the universe. The get picked up at school, their friends place, from the mall. They never walk anywhere because of some fear of some child molester. Their parents give them a cell phone. They are in constant contact with their parents, giving them more belief that their lives are more important then they really are. Many get planned fun every weekend. I could go on.

In my day (late sixties and the seventies) there was no doubt that I was loved, but there was also no doubt that a life outside our house went on and I was very, very far from the center of it. You made your own fun because my parents were busy. For most of the time, they would have absolutely no idea where I was. Although this might be unfortuneate to the 0.00000001% of children that get into trouble from that lack of contact, it instills a concept of self-reliance on the other 99.99999% of children that do just fine in that environment. Relying on themselves and ensuring they pick the right friends to become pals with because it WILL matter later when you need them. You can't just call your mother or your father, all the time. Sometimes you are on your own.

That is the problem with today's kids, if you ask me.


----------



## Gumball (Dec 22, 2011)

redsgomarching said:


> there are no such thing as bad students....only bad teachers.


I hope your post was sarcastic, otherwise what a bunch of baloney that is reds....when I was a lot younger a couple kids I went to class with had parents take their kids side in the argument "this teacher is not good, I cant learn now blah blah blah" those kids used that as an excuse to do bad all year and their parents ate it up... so I tried to use it on my dad and he sat me down and said I don't care about the teacher, a good student can still learn with a bad teacher, this is life son get used to it... that was in grade school and im glad that's what my old man instilled in me... I will be doing the same to my kids


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

OptsyEagle said:


> My opinion is that kids today are taught that they are effectively the center of the universe.


Yeah, unlike the Baby Boomers who have gotten used to running the economy, controlling politics, and having everything done their way. I vividly remember when the Baby Boomers orchestrated the biggest global bailout and stimulus plan in history, just to save their retirement plans and stock portfolios, directly at the expense of everyone under 40.

There sure was a lot of whining and drama from the Boomers watching their grossly inflated wealth suddenly deflate back to normal.

So maybe kids today aren't the only ones who think they're the center of the universe.


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

So true, James. Baby boomers have benefited massively from the post-war boom, high wages from unionization, huge market gains, and massively increasing real estate prices padding their net worth.

Millennials and those after them are stuck with the hangover from the recession, chronically low wages, high student debt, and ridiculous house prices that have completely shut many out of the market in major cities - where most of the work is.

So I think with young people today there is a sense of desperation and grasping for anything they can claim as their right to have. However, I do agree that helicopter parents are doing more harm than good.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

What......baby boomers got slaughtered in the recession. They lost their homes, 401ks, jobs.........everything.

Auto workers were the highest categories of bankruptcies in the US, during that time period. 

Everyone paid the price..........except the bankers and the wealthy. They bought up distressed properties on the cheap and sold them later for huge profits.

Like Steve Munuchin who is the head of the US Treasury.


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

sags said:


> What......baby boomers got slaughtered in the recession. They lost their homes, 401ks, jobs.........everything.
> 
> Auto workers were the highest categories of bankruptcies in the US, during that time period.
> 
> ...


Maybe in the US. In Canada I don't know of any of my relatives, or any of my friend's parents that lost their houses. Most of them are sitting on massive equity.


----------



## My Own Advisor (Sep 24, 2012)

nature or nurture?


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

james4beach said:


> Yeah, unlike the Baby Boomers who have gotten used to running the economy, controlling politics, and having everything done their way. I vividly remember when the Baby Boomers orchestrated the biggest global bailout and stimulus plan in history, just to save their retirement plans and stock portfolios, directly at the expense of everyone under 40.
> 
> There sure was a lot of whining and drama from the Boomers watching their grossly inflated wealth suddenly deflate back to normal.
> 
> So maybe kids today aren't the only ones who think they're the center of the universe.



But the baby boomers ARE the center of the universe. Today's kids are not, but they were taught that they were. That is my point and I really do not know what it matters what the baby boomer's did that has anything to do with the behaviour of today's kids unless you think the baby boomers behavior caused the behaviour of today's kids.

Anyway, I will let you guys get all your beefs off your chest and simply bow out of this one.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

james4beach said:


> Yeah, unlike the Baby Boomers who have gotten used to running the economy, controlling politics, and having everything done their way. *I vividly remember when the Baby Boomers orchestrated* the biggest global bailout and stimulus plan in history, just to save their retirement plans and stock portfolios, directly at the expense of everyone under 40.


Wow ... since you remember it so well with access to the full details - can you tell me who revoked my membership?

I don't recall being invited to the BB's R Us meeting where this was brought up, voted on and implemented. :rolleyes2:


Cheers


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

OptsyEagle said:


> But the baby boomers ARE the center of the universe.


Which in both cases (i.e. James and your POV) misses that it wasn't the BB that benefited so much as the CEOs who weren't prosecuted, who continued to be paid outlandish bonus money etc. 




OptsyEagle said:


> ... That is my point and I really do not know what it matters what the baby boomer's did that has anything to do with the behaviour of today's kids unless you think the baby boomers behavior caused the behaviour of today's kids.


My pre-boomer aunt trained my BB cousin in the same way. Fortunately, she learned to adapt and has been making sure her kid is raised differently.

None of which is relevant to the kid the OP is concerned about or the way whatever label the kid's parents were raised like or how they have chosen to raise the kid in question.


Cheers


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

sags said:


> What......baby boomers got slaughtered in the recession. They lost their homes, 401ks, jobs.........everything.
> Auto workers were the highest categories of bankruptcies in the US, during that time period.
> Everyone paid the price..........except the bankers and the wealthy. They bought up distressed properties on the cheap and sold them later for huge profits.
> Like Steve Munuchin who is the head of the US Treasury.


This confuses me Sags. Are you an American in the US? 
I know there is a place for US discussion on CMF - the extinct Trump thread, impact on NAFTA, economies, etc. But why are you mentioning 401k's, US bankrupcies, and Steve Munuchin (_sp_) in a thread like this??


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

James post discussed global bailouts and stimulus packages. That never happened in Canada, so I assumed he was talking about Americans as an example. 

_I vividly remember when the Baby Boomers orchestrated the biggest global bailout and stimulus plan in history, just to save their retirement plans and stock portfolios, directly at the expense of everyone under 40.
_


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

Ahh, got it. Thanks Sags.
Interesting, I didn't realize (as James has) that the bailout/stimulus was about BB retirement plans and stock portfolios. I also wasn't aware that it was paid for by those under 40. In fact I know a few individuals under 40 who had the wherewithall to invest in the plunging markets back in late 2008 - early 2009. They have done very, very well over the past 9 years.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

0% interest rates (including in Canada), billions of $ of global stimulus to pump up markets ... those absolutely inflated stock portfolios and retirement portfolios. Investment portfolios bounced back to where they were, which isn't a surprise after all that stimulus.

The 1.25% BoC policy rate we have today is a continuation of the emergency liquidity. In my view, all of this inflates assets of the older generation.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

OnlyMyOpinion said:


> I also wasn't aware that it was paid for by those under 40. In fact I know a few individuals under 40 who had the wherewithall to invest in the plunging markets back in late 2008 - early 2009. They have done very, very well over the past 9 years.


Young people don't have any money to invest. This stuff about big ETF portfolios etc is all about baby boomers -- look around this forum. How many participants under age 30 do you see?

The cost/consequences of this global stimulus hits the young especially hard:

1) sky high home prices, inflated by low interest rates
2) high debt to income ratios, generally related to unaffordable costs of living and high housing costs
3) low interest rates that make it impossible to save
4) an economy where the excesses were never flushed out, never reset -- all the imbalances continue today

The older generation has been a spoiled bunch, and I think they really offloaded a lot of pain onto the younger generation, because they wanted to save their business-as-usual excesses and retirement plans. They abused their power (as the current cohort in charge) without consideration for what they are doing to younger people.

Not every boomer, of course, but power is currently in the hands of the boomers. They kicked the can down the road, to not deal with the consequences of what they've done. They disingenuously framed bailouts and low interest rates as "for the good of everyone".


----------



## redsgomarching (Mar 6, 2016)

Gumball said:


> I hope your post was sarcastic, otherwise what a bunch of baloney that is reds....when I was a lot younger a couple kids I went to class with had parents take their kids side in the argument "this teacher is not good, I cant learn now blah blah blah" those kids used that as an excuse to do bad all year and their parents ate it up... so I tried to use it on my dad and he sat me down and said I don't care about the teacher, a good student can still learn with a bad teacher, this is life son get used to it... that was in grade school and im glad that's what my old man instilled in me... I will be doing the same to my kids


your problem is that you are taking it literally to mean only school teachers.....your dad taught you what you had to do. hence, you had a good teacher. the problem is, nobody is willing to do that anymore. parents are not doing what your dad did for you and you want proof? look at our education system. it is a god damn joke lol.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

James, young people have been brought up with participation awards, a “have your cake and eat it too” attitude. 

Very few understand delayed gratification, they spend tomorrow’s dollars on stuff for today then complain they “have no money to invest”. They also rarely know how to earn money other than a paycheque and then feel they deserve a six figure salary to start with and won’t accept a job that offers less. 

I can tell you my kids aren’t like that. I have no worries about their financial success. They don’t look for handouts, they save before they buy and they know many ways to invest.


----------



## redsgomarching (Mar 6, 2016)

Just a Guy said:


> James, young people have been brought up with participation awards, a “have your cake and eat it too” attitude.
> 
> Very few understand delayed gratification, they spend tomorrow’s dollars on stuff for today then complain they “have no money to invest”. They also rarely know how to earn money other than a paycheque and then feel they deserve a six figure salary to start with and won’t accept a job that offers less.
> 
> I can tell you my kids aren’t like that. I have no worries about their financial success. They don’t look for handouts, they save before they buy and they know many ways to invest.


what age group runs our country who is borrowing continuously against the future generation's future to fund all these ridiculous ideas and absolutely insane projects and growing our national debt to oblivion? while i dont have this spend it now attitude i can definitely see where it comes from considering all signs point to us inheriting a royal mess. highest levels of government debt, inflated housing prices, jobs shortages, increased competition, destruction of our earth - because these things are what? accomplishments? the elderly got their cake and ate it too, and are now eating ours, or giving it away to refugees and those who take advantage of the system.


within the last 5-10 years the canadian government (ran by non millennials) have scrapped projects costing tax payer billions. but heck they dont care because they all make inflated salaries for screwing up and putting the burden on the next generations.


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

Baby boomer thought process...

1988: We should start giving kids participation awards, because it's not whether you win or lose, but how hard you try.
2018: Damn those spoiled entitled Millennials and their participation awards!

On the other hand, the trophy industry must have made some boomers pretty wealthy. If they can sell the school 30 awards for each class of kids instead of just three, that's 10 times the profit! (Okay, maybe a bit less, since participation awards are usually less elaborate/smaller than winner's awards.)


----------



## peterk (May 16, 2010)

^ James, guys, I used to rant and rave about boomers too... It felt good to vent. I've since stopped. Why?

*1) It's not going to change anything - Might make things worse. *

If you're complaining about something with no intention of it changing anything, that's pretty much the definition of "whining". Millennial whining in this case. We are literally complaining about history... whatever happened happened. Let's either live with it or do something productive to fix it.

*2) It's not the boomers' fault.*

Boomer citizens and boomer politicians/power brokers are NOT the same people. They just happen to be the same age. Sure, one can make the hollow argument that boomers "let" the rising turmoil that is our modern civilization happen "under their watch", but this goes along with an assumption that boomers are somehow weak-willed or foolish or short sighted _more than the typical generation of people_. I don't believe is true at all.

An unfortunate confluence of bad things all happened simultaneously - Powerful communist and corporatist forces established key footholds in European and American power positions during/after the war. Massive upheaval in the social, legal, economic centers of our culture was implemented without anyone voting on it. Everyone's heads were spinning from simultaneous technological revolutions brought on by industrialization, globalization, computers, etc. and a large cohort of young impressionable people (boomers) were ripe for the taking... They were thrown through economic turmoil, war (Korea, Vietnam), family breakdown (divorce, the pill) and technological revolution, all while under the age of 40.

The worst you might say is that boomers were "used" politically. But if millennials were the young people back then instead of boomers, there is *nothing* saying that the exact same things wouldn't have happened.

Today, boomers are older, but they are still not "in charge".

Politicians are dividing and conquering on every front there is possible to divide and conquer on, including the strongest and most natural political allies of all. Parents and children.

Millennials that are developing anger and resentment for perceived past misdeeds of others need to let it go and wake up to reality. At the same time lots of boomers have their heads in the sand because of undeserved guilt as they look at the state of things and deep down blame themselves. When millennials scream bloody murder it just provokes this and becomes too much to bear, causing even more boomers to retreat.

I think the best path forward is for everyone to forgive and forget, and realize that we are all in this together and for each other. It is absolutely not too late for boomer to "be brave" or for millennials to "grow up and stop whining" and for our society to turn this thing around.


----------



## Freedomeer (Jan 3, 2018)

I agree that blaming boomers will not fix anything. I cant complain as my parents did well by us. Even though my dad had a grade 10 education, he encouraged all of us to go to university and get degrees that actually correlated to jobs.

The biggest concern i have is my generation hasnt been taught the perils of communism. They dont know that more people have been killed by Socialists than Nazis. They think capitalism is bad cause they see the high end, and get jealous but dont look at the tail end. How more people in the world have been taken out of extreme poverty than in all in history and that has to do with capitalism. Sure, there are problems with capitalism, but i would take those over socialism any day. 

I feel like anyone who gets taught about responsibily over rights is bound to do well and make an impact. The problem is my generation has been fed, "you have the right to everything..." without the other end of the equation. If someone has a right, that means you have the responsibilty to ensure that right. We need to be teaching about responsibility instead of rights.


----------



## Freedomeer (Jan 3, 2018)

Everyone should be obligated to read the Gulag Archipeligo and be scared out of their minds in high school....


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I am confident that a guaranteed income is going to solve a lot of these problems.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Yeah, it'll solve the spending money we don't have by spending more money we don't have. Great thinking sags.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

peterk said:


> ^ James, guys, I used to rant and rave about boomers too... It felt good to vent. I've since stopped. Why? . . .
> Boomer citizens and boomer politicians/power brokers are NOT the same people. They just happen to be the same age . . .
> Today, boomers are older, but they are still not "in charge".


Thanks, I think that's a very good point.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Curious if anyone can name a country or a system that doesn't have any poor people? We've had many different political ideologies run but, somehow, mysteriously, some people are always better off and some people are always dead poor. There is drug addiction, crime, homelessness, you name it in every country and throughout history, yet some people still think if we just throw enough money at people, everything will work out.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Norway.........everyone there is worth at least $200,000 USD from the $1 trillion USD oil fund.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Maybe in your made up world...



> In 2016 homeless people in Norway was 3,909 by official goverment nr.or less then 0.75 pearson per 1000 inhabitants.In 2012 the nr.of homeless people was 6,259 whitch correspodent to 1.26 per 1000 inhabitants,36% decline from 2012 to2016.People who are temporary in the country and are homeless are not included in the survay.Homeless in Norway-Regjeringen.no
> 385 Views ·


----------



## coptzr (Jan 18, 2013)

Here's my recent Canadian example.
Hockey season is over. Team has $1500 left in the account. Coach and assistant decide to give something to the teenage kids at year end party. They order 15 medals to the door for just over $1000 after exchange rate, shipping, and tax. The following week order 4 pieces of memorabilia for the 2 coaches and 2 team assistants at $200. At the party $100 in pizza was ordered and tickets were handed out to each player and parent for the organization year end banquet for the following weekend. All leftover funds are now spent.

A) do the kids deserve a medal for completing the hockey season?
B) do the 2 coaches and 2 assistants deserve awards?
C) would the hockey parents prefer $75 cash back instead?
D) what should have been done instead?

No need to discuss this and take away for OP, was just an example I came across this month to support the theory that in today's world, we need to reward everyone and spend everything. I would rather be efficient and be rewarded with a gain/return on investment or growth.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The social democracy in Norway means that being "poor" in Norway is equivalent to "middle class" in America.

In Norway..............free healthcare. In the USA.............no healthcare for the poor.

In Norway..............free education. In the USA.............no education for the poor.

In Norway..............free government pension. In the USA............social security based on earnings.

In Norway..............unemployment insurance pays 1/3rd of the average wage.

https://www.quora.com/What-is-life-like-for-poor-people-in-Norway


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Yet still thousands are homeless.


----------



## RBull (Jan 20, 2013)

Sags, why in most of your arguments do you use the USA as an example? Many others have commented on this before.

Are you an American or living there or does using the US just serve to distort or exaggerate a point you want to make?

I'm going to Norway this summer so I'll get to find out myself about this utopia you aspire to.


----------



## Synergy (Mar 18, 2013)

RBull said:


> I'm going to Norway this summer so I'll get to find out myself about this utopia you aspire to.


FWIW I was in post graduate studies with a few gents from oversees. They use to poke fun at our health care system, minimum wage, education, etc. From what I recall they pay a lot of taxes - 50-80%. I believe one of the fellows was from Norway, one from Switzerland and the other from Sweden. Not sure why they decided to study here in Canada - culture, travels, experience, etc.? 

There's no such thing as a free lunch ;o)


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

RBull said:


> Sags, why in most of your arguments do you use the USA as an example? Many others have commented on this before.
> 
> Are you an American or living there or does using the US just serve to distort or exaggerate a point you want to make?
> 
> I'm going to Norway this summer so I'll get to find out myself about this utopia you aspire to.


The US capitalist model is what conservatives would like to turn Canada's social democracy into.

Opposition to CPP enhancements, OAS retrenchment, minimum wage and other benefits, and promotion of privatization are examples of that desire.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Why can't we have something in between like fiscal responsibility? You know, not spending more than we make? Not standing around demanding our "entitlements"? Why must we take from someone else? Sags, you complain how the rich are taking from the poor, yet you advocate the reverse and can't even see how hypocritical that is. The rich aren't taking in most cases they are earning it, whereas the same can't be said for the poor. 

You seem to thrive on FUD, not to mention spreading it and constantly have your handout demanding freebies...if only you'd channelled that into actually making money, you probably could have been one of the richest people on this board.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Your understanding of "financial responsibility" as cutting benefits to balance budgets may not be acceptable to other people.

Their understanding of "financial responsibility" may be saving the benefits by increasing government revenues.


----------



## Freedomeer (Jan 3, 2018)

This thread has taken an interesting turn. The one comment I have is, I am completely opposed to the CPP enhancements. I don't need government telling me that I am too irresponsible to save appropriately for retirement. In my opinion, it is a huge overreach. It only affects people who make more than 50k, and if they can't save properly, then it is their fault. Government should not have to tell people they need to save.

As for Norway. Corporate tax was reduced in 2017 to 23%. So when US lowers national corporate tax to 21%, they are just completing with these Socialist countries....


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Doug Ford comes out of the gate announcing he will eliminate the future $1 increase in the minimum wage.

Why do conservatives hate the poor so much ?


----------



## hboy54 (Sep 16, 2016)

sags said:


> Your understanding of "financial responsibility" as cutting benefits to balance budgets may not be acceptable to other people.
> 
> Their understanding of "financial responsibility" may be saving the benefits by increasing government revenues.


This debate reminds me of the conclusion I reached about 15 years ago: it is only sensible to either aim to be wealthy or poor, to aim for middle class is a losing move. The advantage of wealth is clear, but there is also advantage in choosing to be unproductive and poor: absolute freedom if you can figure out how to get by on the $10,000 or so the government will give you just for being a Canadian. In the middle, you have neither enough money to buy much, but you also lack the ability to live a life unencumbered by a job. You get the disadvantages of both the wealthy and the poor.

The irony is that as much as sags hates people like me, the end result for my money will be the same. Most of my wealth will go to someone other than me. Either by way of the state in taking it via taxation, or how I choose to give it away. I think my wife and I are up to 8 young people we have dished out education funds to and not one of them is a genetic descendant.

hboy54


----------



## RBull (Jan 20, 2013)

sags said:


> The US capitalist model is what conservatives would like to turn Canada's social democracy into.
> 
> Opposition to CPP enhancements, OAS retrenchment, minimum wage and other benefits, and promotion of privatization are examples of that desire.


That's a vastly generalized, exagerated and an overly simplistic view, and it's not true. You're trying to paint all conservatives, SOME of whom resist the INCREASING OF SOCIAL PROGRAMS as advocates for turning the country into a US clone. That's silly. There's no evidence because someone votes conservative they want to turn Canada into the USA, and your arguments might have some merit if they actually considered this. 

For example few if any Canadians (even Conservatives) want to deny access by citizens to universal health care. Few if any want to cancel or don't see the benefit of having CPP. Any conservatives I know are proud we have some valuable social programs in this country and have no interest in turning Canada into the US. There is however some disagreement over endless spending increases in our social programs that you seem to advocate, particularly when the governments don't have the courage to ask all tax paying citizens to actually pay for them now by raising taxes like Norway that you use as an example. They simply hand more money out and finance it for future generations to pay for. This isn't responsible and shows a lack of leadership. 

Retrenchment from OAS has been done in other socialized countries like Germany. They were smart to recognize changing demographics, considered the original intent of the program and sustainability to raise the eligibility age, as our previous government wisely did. We would do well to review this whole program and revamp it so couples earning $150K yr weren't receiving seniors welfare, and monies could be better directed and utlilized elsewhere like an improved GIS etc. This is sensible and has nothing to do with wanting to turn Canada into the USA. 

I don't expect you in any way to agree with any of this. Your idea seems to be the government should be handing out much more money than they are now on everything and that this will solve all problems, that all capitalism is evil and anyone earning a higher income isn't paying their way, that conservatives have no interest in some warranted social programs, that the onus is on the government to run our lives and provide for all citizens and that personal responsibility and a society that rewards upward mobility isn't important . That's closer to Cuba and not how I envision a prosperous and great Canada.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Fortunately, Canadians wisely reject conservative ideology and prefer to move progressively forward.

Perhaps conservatives battle so hard in opposition to changes, because they recognize Canada is on a long pathway to a deeper socialized democracy.


----------



## RBull (Jan 20, 2013)

sags said:


> Fortunately, Canadians wisely reject conservative ideology and prefer to move progressively forward.
> 
> Perhaps conservatives battle so hard in opposition to changes, because they recognize Canada is on a long pathway to a deeper socialized democracy.


I note you didn't respond to most of my statements but prefer to exaggerate as if ALL Canadians reject conservative ideology. Some do, some don't and that will never change. What we have now is the natural pendulum swing from one party to another, not some great change in ideology for the country that you long for. That doesn't make voters for increased social programs wise, especially when there is no plan to pay for them. As you no doubt can also see but probably won't admit we're already seeing some of this swing back to conservatives, as the mistakes, incompetence and broken promises of the Trudeau era become more common and evident. 

I don't think its so accurate to describe all conservatives as being so opposed to changes. We just want different changes than you- ones that make more financial sense, that don't reduce the motivation and reward for citizens, and that make us a stronger more competitive nation. It's going to be a very difficult time for future generations that have to pay the price for deeper social programs. Too many people today can't see this for themselves on personal finances let alone governments. 

Perhaps the reason why some staunch socialists battle so hard for handouts is they haven't been able to do better on their own merits and it's easy to lobby for more when they plan for others to pay for it all and can't see at some point we'll run out of other peoples money or reason to keep it afloat. 

Good luck with your Cuba.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

RBull said:


> That's a vastly generalized, exagerated and an overly simplistic view, and it's not true. You're trying to paint all conservatives, SOME of whom resist the INCREASING OF SOCIAL PROGRAMS as advocates for turning the country into a US clone. That's silly. There's no evidence because someone votes conservative they want to turn Canada into the USA, and your arguments might have some merit if they actually considered this.
> 
> For example few if any Canadians (even Conservatives) want to deny access by citizens to universal health care. Few if any want to cancel or don't see the benefit of having CPP. Any conservatives I know are proud we have some valuable social programs in this country and have no interest in turning Canada into the US. There is however some disagreement over endless spending increases in our social programs that you seem to advocate, particularly when the governments don't have the courage to ask all tax paying citizens to actually pay for them now by raising taxes like Norway that you use as an example. They simply hand more money out and finance it for future generations to pay for. This isn't responsible and shows a lack of leadership.
> 
> ...




whew! i did read all the above & i survived the morning. You have some excellent points.*

now, what are you doing about encouraging fellow maritimer peter mcKay back into politics? he'd make a great prime minister. 


* PS however criticizing sags for having his hand out is not accurate. Sags never has his hand out for himself. He's always arguing for the good for the majority of canadians. In real life, i suspect sags is a sweetheart who spoils his neighbours, friends, family, community & any needy strangers he happens to hear of, something awesome .each:


.


----------



## RBull (Jan 20, 2013)

humble_pie said:


> whew! i did read all the above & i survived the morning. You have some excellent points.*
> 
> now, what are you doing about encouraging fellow maritimer peter mcKay back into politics? he'd make a great prime minister.
> 
> ...


Well that's good that you survived HP and thank you. Yes, he would make a good PM but I don't think I'm going to have any more sway with Peter M than others would, and especially his wife!

I didn't realize above I criticized or accused Sags of having his hand out personally. I'm sure he like many other on this forum do well for themselves and do lots for others too.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Humble.........As per usual you are too kind.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

sags said:


> Humble.........As per usual you are too kind.


Have any kids sags???


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

No kids........one son but he is an adult now.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

sags said:


> No kids........one son but he is an adult now.


I suggest taking a walk to a park where there are little kids, then pondering how that generation will pay for a trillion dollars in wasted spending. If you are truly the caring individual they say, that would bring a tear to your eye then and there.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

As long as his pocket is lined, I'm sure he'll feel fine. Not like he'll be around when the piper shows up for payment.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

tygrus said:


> I suggest taking a walk to a park where there are little kids, then pondering how that generation will pay for a trillion dollars in wasted spending. If you are truly the caring individual they say, that would bring a tear to your eye then and there.


Why are you defending an economic system that would create that debt ? Why would you defend tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy instead of paying the debt ?


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Out of curiosity, specifically which program spending should be cut to achieve a surplus and reduce the debt ?


----------



## RBull (Jan 20, 2013)

sags said:


> I am confident that a guaranteed income is going to solve a lot of these problems.


Thought you'd be interesting in seeing this. The key words I read were "find $43.1B". It doesn't sound like even the big spending Trudeau social liberals have the stomach for this. 

http://business.financialpost.com/n...a-national-basic-income-would-cost-76-billion


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

There isn't much information in the article on which programs the auditor would fold into a guaranteed income benefit.

Would it replace child benefits, disability benefits, GIS benefits ? Did the auditor include the current cost of those benefits ?

I think the guaranteed income needs to be explored in full so everyone knows all the details before making a decision.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

sags said:


> .........
> In Norway..............free healthcare. In the USA.............no healthcare for the poor.
> 
> In Norway..............free education. In the USA.............no education for the poor.
> ...


Don't forget that Norway's generous social programs are paid for by building pipelines to accommodate all their oil and gas exports. They're one of the largest exporters in the world. 

Why is it in Canada that all the left leaning socialists continue to cripple our country by blocking enormous wealth capabilities in oil and gas exports that could be used to pay for all these social programs, while a country like Norway (that the left always embraces as a model society) takes full advantage of their resources?

ltr


----------



## RBull (Jan 20, 2013)

True, there isn't much info. 

I am assuming this includes and replaces other programs. 7.5 million is a big chunk of the population. 

When will we see the results of the Ontario experiment? Unless that is very "positive" I don't think this will see the light of day nationally to even be seriously considered.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

Dont forget that Norway is a population about half ours living on a land area about the size of Vancouver Island. They have a fraction of the infrastructure to maintain that we do. And they are backed by the EU. Think of Norway as Vancouver Island with 15 million people and 4 or 5 Hibernia's sitting off the coast backed by a trading block. No comparison to Canada at all.


----------



## Freedomeer (Jan 3, 2018)

I think guaranteed income would be a very bad thing for a lot of people who are at rock bottom. Growing up, my neighbor had a son who had a masters in engineering. He was homeless and had numerous addiction problems. You give someone like that a cheque every month, guess who will be dead before you know it. Anyone who has major addiction problems, their saving grace is no money to feed the addiction.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

If everyone is given a living wage, what happens when everyone stops working? Where does the money come from? Can’t tax corporations, they don’t have employees to work for them, can’t tax the rich because they aren’t working either and their corporations are all shut down from lack of workers. We can’t even live off resource revenues because no one will harvest them.


----------



## hboy54 (Sep 16, 2016)

Just a Guy said:


> If everyone is given a living wage, what happens when everyone stops working? Where does the money come from? Can’t tax corporations, they don’t have employees to work for them, can’t tax the rich because they aren’t working either and their corporations are all shut down from lack of workers. We can’t even live off resource revenues because no one will harvest them.


Hey, wait. Are you talking about Venezuala?


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

Just a Guy said:


> We can’t even live off resource revenues because no one will harvest them.


Plus we will have millions of new idle SJWs on our hands with nothing better to do that protest everything.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

And................we are all the way back to the "spoiled kids" again.........LOL.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

Just a Guy said:


> If everyone is given a living wage, what happens when everyone stops working?


No govt in the modern world can pay a living wage to the majority of its citazens. The studies are talking about $1000 per month, about the same as welfare. Not sure where you would live on that wage.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Have you done the math? 35M people in Canada. $1000/month. 35B/month. 420B/year that’s more than the federal budget. Where does it come from?


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

One estimate cost was $16 billion, another was $43 billion and one was $76 billion.

There is no way of judging the cost without knowing all the parameters.

The Ontario plan is a "top up" plan that would cost much less and appears successfully making a difference so far.

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/20...ipients-report-less-stress-better-health.html


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

sags said:


> The Ontario plan is a "top up" plan that would cost much less and appears successfully making a difference so far.


Unfortunately, Ontario can't afford to add another roll of toilet paper to their budget after the inevitable happened today. Those pesky socialists just don't seem to understand that you eventually run out of other peoples money to spend.
_
Moody’s Investors Service has changed the outlook on the province of Ontario’s ratings from “stable” to “negative” in the wake of Finance Minister Charles Sousa’s March 28 spending plan, which featured a $6.7-billion deficit.
_
ltr


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

sags said:


> One estimate cost was $16 billion, another was $43 billion and one was $76 billion.
> 
> There is no way of judging the cost without knowing all the parameters.
> 
> ...


Since these numbers are less than the current social programs, wouldn't that be giving the poor less money? That's the opposite of what you normally preach. If this is over and above the current spending, I repeat the question, where does the money come from? 16B is higher than the federal deficit. 

Are you willing to have your son experience 100% tax rates? We're already over 50% and running deficits across the country and that doesn't include the HST, and other hidden taxes in that 50% calculation.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

How on earth can you have a guaranteed income when you have a trillion plus debt to deal with. 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/federal-market-debt-1.4590441?cmp=rss


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

On the deficit and debt....

You can raise revenues or cut spending. 

I would choose to raise revenues to cover the spending. 

What would you do ?


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

sags said:


> I would choose to raise revenues to cover the spending.


I agree, lets raise retirement to 70 and clawback OAS and CPP. That ok with you ?


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

I would ask where the money will come from still since we're taxed over 50% and are already running huge deficits depending on which province you're in. Tax much more and people will ask what's the point of working, I don't get any money for my efforts.

Maybe we could implement a "renter's tax" since renters don't pay property taxes. People with rents well below average would, of course, pay more since they shouldn't have an unfair deal.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

Just a Guy said:


> Maybe we could implement a "renter's tax" since renters don't pay property taxes.


Maybe renters could be offered a tax deduction on their rent to level the playing field with owners of principal residences. Let's blow that dough since it is OPM.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

That's it ? That is the best you guys can come up with after all the complaining about deficits and debt ?

To make a difference you will have to cut deeply into education, healthcare, OAS/GIS................which is your preference ?


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Putting a guaranteed income into context of the cost.

_Overall, we identified 75 federal initiatives that provide roughly $57 billion of financial support or services to people with low income and other vulnerable groups in 2017-18

There are 55 programs with expenditures of $39.3 billion and 20 tax expenditures that provided $17.5 billion. _

Provincial benefits would be in addition to the above. The cost of administering 75 federal initiatives would also be an additional expense.

http://www.pbo-dpb.gc.ca/web/defaul...or Low Income Individuals and Families_EN.pdf


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Some people who own their homes are collecting GIS. Some of these homes are worth a million dollars or more.

Should people who own real estate property be eligible for GIS ?

These are the types of hard questions that should be asked and answered if anyone is truly serious about deficit and debt reduction.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Well, let’s put it into the reality of my household. 

If I don’t have the money to buy steak for dinner, I don’t get to eat steak for dinner. I need to find a cheaper meal. I may still want steak, but I don’t get to have it. 

The same goes for all the different benefits health care, OaS, education whatever. I may want everything in health care to be covered, but if I can’t afford it I can’t afford it. It means we do without. 

When I was broke, I didn’t go to the dentist on a regular basis because I couldn’t afford to. I wanted to, it would be beneficial for me to have gone, but that didn’t change the fact that I didn’t have the money for it or insurance. I was forced to do without. 

This is something we call reality. Adults face it all the time. It tends to suck sometimes.

Of course, getting back on to the thread topic, children tend to believe that money is unlimited and that they should be able to have anything they want whenever they want it. Some children never grow up it seems.


----------



## RBull (Jan 20, 2013)

sags said:


> That's it ? That is the best you guys can come up with after all the complaining about deficits and debt ?
> 
> To make a difference you will have to cut deeply into education, healthcare, OAS/GIS................which is your preference ?


What is your plan to "raise revenues"? Deficits and debt are a serious concern not to be blown off, especially when we're racking it up during relative boom times = crazy. 

OAS and GIS need revamps as I've stated before. People sitting on huge assets they lucked out on in some areas like you mention but with little income receiving GIS (and some areas paying way less than their share of city tax also) , TFSAs not counting, a couple with income of 150K receiving full seniors welfare starting at age 65 and with lifespans growing a year plus every decade. Makes no sense on any of these. Healthcare is a cluster - costs spiraling out of control, lack of physicians, long wait times at least where I am. We have zero incentives to get many more people looking after themselves much better (lifestyle) to dramatically reduce long term costs on preventable medical issues. People are the most unhealthy ever. There is no way we can raise revenues enough to fix this without addressing the problem.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Finland is scrapping their UBI program...

https://nordic.businessinsider.com/Finland-is-killing-its-world-famous-basic-income-experiment--/


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Maybe the Ontario version of the UBI that is gathering so many accolades will provide an example to the world ?

It is pretty useless to give someone $600 a month. If you can't run with the big dogs........stay on the porch, is what I say.


----------



## Mortgage u/w (Feb 6, 2014)

I would cancel all income taxes and jack up the consumer tax.

Takehome would be tax free. But every item you purchase will have a 35% or 40% tax. The more you spend, the more you pay.
No more black market since no one needs to declare their profits. And no one can complain that taxes are too high - no one is forcing you to spend needlessly.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Well that would certainly kill the tourist industry.


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

Mortgage u/w said:


> I would cancel all income taxes and jack up the consumer tax.
> 
> Takehome would be tax free. But every item you purchase will have a 35% or 40% tax. The more you spend, the more you pay.
> No more black market since no one needs to declare their profits. And no one can complain that taxes are too high - no one is forcing you to spend needlessly.


That doesn't get rid of the black market; it just moves the goal posts a bit. Consider a $100 item: In a store, it would be $100 plus $40 in tax, for a total of $140. One the black market, a seller might charge $110 flat -- saving the customer $30, while still giving themselves an edge in profit over the store. That gives both them and the customer and incentive to do business.


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

Canada's current mix of income:consumption taxes is about 75%:25% which is higher than the US but lower than most OECD countries (https://hillnotes.ca/2017/03/23/consumption-taxes-in-canada-revenue-rates-and-rationale/).
It is easier to build 'progressivity' into an income tax than a consumption tax (i.e. low income earners have to spend most of their income on consumption and would face a disproportionate burden) . 
A blend of tax sources seems to make sense to me. We can trust governments to screw things up/piss it away regardless of how they get it anyway. :distrust:


----------



## redsgomarching (Mar 6, 2016)

OnlyMyOpinion said:


> Canada's current mix of income:consumption taxes is about 75%:25% which is higher than the US but lower than most OECD countries (https://hillnotes.ca/2017/03/23/consumption-taxes-in-canada-revenue-rates-and-rationale/).
> It is easier to build 'progressivity' into an income tax than a consumption tax (i.e. low income earners have to spend most of their income on consumption and would face a disproportionate burden) .
> A blend of tax sources seems to make sense to me. We can trust governments to screw things up/piss it away regardless of how they get it anyway. :distrust:


thats the problem, there arent enough resources on keeping the government in check lol and or there is just massive payoffs at every level. like i said, there needs to be a dramatic change in politics for this to happen and i dont see it as very likely.


----------



## hystat (Jun 18, 2010)

OptsyEagle said:


> My opinion is that kids today are taught that they are effectively the center of the universe. The get picked up at school, their friends place, from the mall. They never walk anywhere because of some fear of some child molester. Their parents give them a cell phone. They are in constant contact with their parents, giving them more belief that their lives are more important then they really are. Many get planned fun every weekend. I could go on.
> 
> In my day (late sixties and the seventies) there was no doubt that I was loved, but there was also no doubt that a life outside our house went on and I was very, very far from the center of it. You made your own fun because my parents were busy. For most of the time, they would have absolutely no idea where I was. Although this might be unfortuneate to the 0.00000001% of children that get into trouble from that lack of contact, it instills a concept of self-reliance on the other 99.99999% of children that do just fine in that environment. Relying on themselves and ensuring they pick the right friends to become pals with because it WILL matter later when you need them. You can't just call your mother or your father, all the time. Sometimes you are on your own.
> 
> That is the problem with today's kids, if you ask me.


^ awesome


----------

