# Baby Boomer Venting some personal thoughts



## 1980z28 (Mar 4, 2010)

first house @ 19% in the early 80`s

Savings account today 1-2 %

Sure sucks for someone my age

ON the flip side

My kids have mortgage at below 3%,but


----------



## My Own Advisor (Sep 24, 2012)

...but no/few jobs and not rewarding them for saving anything (due to low interest rates).

Not a good combo


----------



## 1980z28 (Mar 4, 2010)

My Own Advisor said:


> ...but no/few jobs and not rewarding them for saving anything (due to low interest rates).
> 
> Not a good combo


please explain


----------



## My Own Advisor (Sep 24, 2012)

Aren't many 20-somethings still living at home? Some 30-somethings I know are living at home. Is this is a good thing?

Also, I don't feel 2% interest payments are a reward for saving. Not like it was at some points in the 1980s, bonds were making 10%+ for a few years.

Are dirt low interest rates helping anyone? I guess I'm just not convinced.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I am happy for our DB pensions coming in.............and sad for those people who took the commuted values.

I know one school principal who chose a $1,000,000 commuted value over his pension. He immediately lost a big whack to taxes, and then lost 40% of his remaining money in the stock market.

The stock market eventually gained some back, but he had to pay the bills while he waited.....and because he lost 40% and had to withdraw from the fund for income.....he needed an almost 90% return to break even again............if he ever did.

Last I heard he was back on the casual list for teachers. 

We could end up with a scenario where retirees aren't getting enough income from their investments, and everyone else is buried in debt.


----------



## brad (May 22, 2009)

Interest rates should always be compared with the inflation rate. Back when regular savings accounts were paying 5% and five-year GICs were paying 10% or more, inflation was in the double digits. You might actually be better off at today's rates; you were losing a lot of buying power from year to year if you kept your savings in an account earning 5%.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I don't think so. Back in the days of high inflation, most employees were getting raises to compensate.

Today, a lot of people haven't seen a decent raise in years.

People are earning $15 an hour doing the exact same job as I did for $33 an hour...........10 years ago, when I retired in 2005.

Shift premiums back then were additional 5% for afternoon shift and 10% for night shift.

Today they are something like 15 cents an hour for afternoons and 25 cents an hour for night shift.

It has been a downhill slide for employees, while corporations had so much cash they didn't know what to do with it all.

What to do..........raise dividends, buy another company, or maybe share buybacks..........


----------



## none (Jan 15, 2013)

Give me a break. baby boomers are the most entitled group of individuals on the planet. The lived off 'the greatest generation' who built all the infrastructure, have lived in a period of peace and huge economic growth, were given free and competitive education, hogged into great pensions and job security and the icing on the cake extracted a 2 generations of housing gains JUST before they retire. Old person... PLEASE.

Now the oldies complain that they don't want to pay for education - grade 12 which they received is worth a post secondary diploma or a degree currently but "don't touch my health care or other entitlements". Ridiculous.


----------



## 1980z28 (Mar 4, 2010)

There is a large group of baby boomers still working after 65

There are a lot of younger persons with out jobs

My parents never used credit

Many new parents today live on credit,hoping the children will learn from that,it is not a positive to live pass your means

Not that this is news


----------



## My Own Advisor (Sep 24, 2012)

sags said:


> I don't think so. Back in the days of high inflation, most employees were getting raises to compensate.
> 
> Today, a lot of people haven't seen a decent raise in years.
> 
> People are earning $15 an hour doing the exact same job as I did for $30 an hour...........10 years ago.


I think Sags has a good point, are salaries keeping up with inflation? It seems the answer to this is "no" but I could be wrong and I don't have the data handy.


----------



## 1980z28 (Mar 4, 2010)

When I went to work in 78 I received 1.78 per hour

It was not until 1980 I made 3.25 per hour

Mortgage was 356/ month plus 60/month for land tax

I worked 6 days a week,such a long time ago

Never had a education after high school,just went to work


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The data I have read is that if wages had kept up with inflation, the minimum wage would be $21.00 an hour and average salaries would be $90,000 a year.

A young person today considers themselves lucky to earn $18 an hour.

When I was younger............everybody earned $18 an hour and aspired for more by working for a big corporation like 3M, Labatt or Ford.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

My Own Advisor said:


> Aren't many 20-somethings still living at home? Some 30-somethings I know are living at home.
> Is this is a good thing? ...


I guess it depends on one's perspective ... 

If there's strife at home & one is comparing to what one's parents did ... likely not a good thing.
If one compares to the millions living with their parents sifting through the dump to find food ... probably not too bad.


Cheers


----------



## 1980z28 (Mar 4, 2010)

Most trades make the same money,many other occupations make much more


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

In 1970 I was earning exactly $5.00 an hour as a supervisor. By 2005 I was earning $33 an hour.

There were wage increases to keep up with inflation. 

From what I have read and observed.............it all started falling apart with the "free trade" theory.

The Auto Pact got cancelled and China started flooding the markets with cheap goods.

Young people won't remember that we used to manufacture radios, televisions, refrigerators, stoves, furniture........everything in Canada.

We had a thriving shoe and textile industry. There were cobblers in every city who repaired finely crafted Canadian shoes.

There were small appliance repair shops, television repair shops.............lots of service jobs for small business.

Today..........it is cheap crap from China...........throw it out and buy another one. No jobs created in that.

The free trade proponents knew we would lose jobs to China, but they had no idea how deep it would get.

Lost jobs were supposed to be replaced with transportation and dock jobs..........but the invention of intermodal containers eliminated that plan.

Looking back in the history books...........future students will study the history of free trade and wonder how we could have been so stupid.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

1980z28 said:


> I am 54 make 70k part time,37 years experience as a mechanic,work 3 days a week
> 
> Most trades make the same money,many other occupations make much more


Mechanic is a great trade and very useful knowledge to possess. It opens the gateway to hobbies and provides a solid living.

I wonder though.......were you ever told by educators..........as my son was..........that if he didn't go to university he wouldn't amount to much.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

none said:


> Give me a break. ... , were given free and competitive education, ...


Odd ... my dad was born a decade plus before the baby boomers were and was thankful for the free & competitive he received so the timing seems off.




none said:


> ... hogged into great pensions and job security ...


I'm not sure the baby boomers I know of that were declared redundant as they got close to a pension would agree on either of these points. 


*PS*

I suspect the baby boomers I know who were rolling waffle cones for minimum wage to pay for their university education as they'd been taught by their parents to not carry debt would wonder about the education part as well.


Cheers


----------



## 1980z28 (Mar 4, 2010)

Eclectic12 said:


> Odd ... my dad was born a decade plus before the baby boomers were was thankful for the free & competitive he received so the timing seems off.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


+1

Did not mean for this tread to get so personal

It was just a perspective on changing world markets and pressures on ones family for the future


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

Haha...my kid suggested a few years back that he would like to move home with his girlfriend...I sold my house and bought a sailboat to avoid this (he gets seasick)
Since then he has manned up,quit whining,and is earning 6 figures in the oil sands (and yes the reported layoffs are mostly in the media's head, his company just added almost 1000 skilled workers)
As for manufacturing in Canada...*censored **** ****


----------



## Letran (Apr 7, 2014)

none said:


> Give me a break. baby boomers are the most entitled group of individuals on the planet. The lived off 'the greatest generation' who built all the infrastructure, have lived in a period of peace and huge economic growth, were given free and competitive education, hogged into great pensions and job security and the icing on the cake extracted a 2 generations of housing gains JUST before they retire. Old person... PLEASE.
> 
> Now the oldies complain that they don't want to pay for education - grade 12 which they received is worth a post secondary diploma or a degree currently but "don't touch my health care or other entitlements". Ridiculous.


 I can't say I disagree. 

My parents are baby boomers but we are immigrants 25 years ago. So they didn't exactly benefit from times at least not in Canada. My uncles though who've been here since the 70s seems to remember those as the good old days. Jobs right out of high-school, university. Job security, No need for RRSPs because everybody is expected to get a huge pension. 

Instead for us, working stiffs now we live in a age where COUNTRIES are going bankrupt.

I could agree though that 2008+ was a bad for the people that was just about to retire.

Times change. Better or worse will depend on your perspective. 

So yeah, I wonder who got the better end of that stick.


----------



## Letran (Apr 7, 2014)

sags said:


> From what I have read and observed.............it all started falling apart with the "free trade" theory.
> 
> The Auto Pact got cancelled and China started flooding the markets with cheap goods.
> 
> ...


I do not know how we can complain from "cheap crap from China" and the same time go to Walmart and buy a cart full of stuff.

It's easy to complain about free trade and at the same time reap from its benefits. I'm sad that manufacturing in Ontario, in Canada for these types of goods are not competitive. But we have to acknowledge that we are part of a global economy we can pretend that China is not there, but it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. We could have position ourselves a bit better maybe to the changing economic climate. But Free Trade was inevitable.

If anything history have thought us as a country living in your own cocoon does not work in the long term.


----------



## Letran (Apr 7, 2014)

1980z28 said:


> +1
> 
> Did not mean for this tread to get so personal
> 
> It was just a perspective on changing world markets and pressures on ones family for the future


We are a passionate bunch


----------



## JordoR (Aug 20, 2013)

In my opinion, the one thing about the baby boomers generation that I won't see in the current generation is the dramatic increase in property value.

Essentially real estate from 2004-2012ish (give or take in that range) doubled in value on a local level in almost any region (suburbs, downtown, etc.). I feel like now people in their 20-30's, are stuck trying to buy a place at this incredible high price, and we won't see the same doubling that occurred in approximately 10 years in the range I previously mentioned.

This was a great buying opportunity and I wish at the time I was at the age to do something about it. I just can't see a house in the suburbs for 500k or an apartment/townhome in the city for 600k, doubling in value in the next ten years.


----------



## Jon_Snow (May 20, 2009)

I basically have very little time for complainers in any given generation. Hard work goes a long way.


----------



## Sherlock (Apr 18, 2010)

I'm surprised by the trend of young people opting to leave cities for the country. Boomers overwhelmingly moved to cities/suburbs. If you grew up in a small town or the country, the trend was to move to a bigger town/city. That trend seems to be reversing.

Here's an interesting article with some statistics: From 2010-2013 Vancouver saw a net loss of 20-30 year olds of 1125 people, despite the city growing by 20,000 people in that period.

http://www.vancourier.com/news/back-to-the-land-2-0-1.1749871


----------



## 1980z28 (Mar 4, 2010)

sags said:


> Mechanic is a great trade and very useful knowledge to possess. It opens the gateway to hobbies and provides a solid living.
> 
> I wonder though.......were you ever told by educators..........as my son was..........that if he didn't go to university he wouldn't amount to much.


Pretty much homeless at 18,so got a job at a gas station,an than went on to the apprenticeship program,got licence in 84 so 37 years in trade,have a 310S and a 310T,can easily make over 100k a year,lots of work out there


----------



## 1980z28 (Mar 4, 2010)

Sherlock said:


> I'm surprised by the trend of young people opting to leave cities for the country. Boomers overwhelmingly moved to cities/suburbs. If you grew up in a small town or the country, the trend was to move to a bigger town/city. That trend seems to be reversing.
> 
> Here's an interesting article with some statistics: From 2010-2013 Vancouver saw a net loss of 20-30 year olds of 1125 people, despite the city growing by 20,000 people in that period.
> 
> http://www.vancourier.com/news/back-to-the-land-2-0-1.1749871


I am from a small town,move to ontario,purchase 126 acres 5 years ago to retire in two years back to the small town,I will be 56 when I retire


----------



## Erome (Jan 11, 2011)

This article from Maclean's last September.

*Seniors and the generation spending gap
Why are we doing so much to try to help seniors when they’re already the wealthiest generation in history?*

http://www.macleans.ca/society/life/seniors-and-the-generation-spending-gap/

This is one of those topics where everyone's perception will be shaped by anecdotal evidence. "I did this therefore... or my parents did this therefore..." While that may be true for that scenario, it may not be appropriate to generalize it across the entire generation. Maclean's offers some interesting statistics that can be used to portray income across generations.


----------



## GreatLaker (Mar 23, 2014)

Every generation has its challenges. People born at the start of the 20th century lived through 2 world wars and the depression before they were 50. People born in the 20s experienced the depression and WWII in their formative years. My mom really knew how to stretch a $, which came in handy raising a family in the 1970s. I have an uncle that once talked about losing the family farm on the prairies in the depression. Baby boomers lived thru the end of the cold war, Vietnam war, tech crash and the financial meltdown of 2008. I don't begrudge them any of their wealth.

The market did not recover from the depression on a price basis until the 1950s, although on a total return and including deflation it recovered much faster. Imagine retiring in 1968 after the Go Go years and watching the market crash 40% in 1973-4 and take until 1980 to recover, while interest rates crushed the value of your fixed income, and inflation ravaged your purchasing power. And from 1999 to 2010 the market had 2 major crashes and ended about where it was a decade earlier, much to the chagrin of tech employees and people that retired in the late 90s on a wave from the .com bubble.

I was born in the late 1950s, times were good in the 60s, but in the 70s I remember my mom talking about having to cut back and be careful with money. Luckily she learned how to do that in the depression from her mom. I went to university in the 70s, while my friends worked in mines and mills for $7 an hour and laughed at me as I tried to get by on $20 a week (but draft beer was 4 for a $). I paid may way through 4 years of school working as a dishwasher, security guard, labourer and finally as an engineering student. Since I graduated and started work I always remember cutbacks, layoffs, downsizing, off-shoring, plants closing, and early retirements. I remember exactly where I was on October 19, 1987. There were good economic times, but the bad ones are burned into my memory a lot deeper.

Young people nowadays have it tough as the rich get richer, the poor are supported by a great social net and health care, but the middle class gets squeezed, and it's hard to even find an internship - even one that does not pay. On the other hand they all have iPhones, iPads, Playstations, live on Facebook and many of them have traveled more by 30 than a lot of older people will ever travel in their life.

I do have a sense that the North American economy is not going to be the leader in the future the way it has been for the last century. Read Once Upon a Car if you want to see how North American industry screwed up. Or read Adventure Capitalist by Jim Rogers to learn his perspective on the future of the global economy. (Just don't take his investing advice.)

Despite low interest rates and the market gyrating wildly, my couch potato portfolio is up over 10% a year for the last 3 years. It seems surreal, too good to be true, and could end any day. But complaining and worrying does not help. Work hard, manage your money carefully, invest prudently, and every once in a while kick back and relax.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

I think people fail to realize the entitlement and problems began years before the boomers...

When the government instituted many benefits, old age security, welfare, free health care, etc. most of the beneficiaries (the elderly in many cases) hadn't really contributed anything towards funding it. Now, an arguement can be made that they paid through their suffering (the depression, world wars, etc.), but the idea was based on an increasing population would pay for the costs...and the baby boom helped the funding of the then, beneficiaries of the program.

Of course, the boomers didn't have as many kids, but paid their entire working lives into a fund which they were told would benefit all people...only to get to the end and discover, that no one is able to pay for them...in fact, the current generation woke up and realized that no one was going to pay for them...and they are on the hook for an astronomical of debt run up by several generations before them...

We've all been brought up believing in free health care, retirement benefits, employment insurance, raises, etc....with little thought of where all the money comes from to pay for it...

Yet every year, we vote for whichever government promises us more free stuff...

We feel entitled to free child care, more vacations, less taxes...the governments keep promising it...all we need to do is tax the rich...

While I enjoy the benefits as much as the next canadian, I realize that the house of cards is built on a foundation of sand...it won't surprise me when it all comes tumbling down...

Eventually, the taps will be turned off and the money will have to be repaid...the benefits will disappear, and we will be in for some hard times...

We see this all the time with individuals living beyond their means, this board rips people like that apart...but we ignore that our country has been doing it for decades.


----------



## gt_23 (Jan 18, 2014)

1980z28 said:


> first house @ 19% in the early 80`s
> 
> Savings account today 1-2 %
> 
> ...


On the flip side, the price of the house was cheap and you got to experience probably the greatest financial and real estate market advances in modern history and for the foreseeable future.

Not too mention starting adult life from zero instead of in the red.

Nothing lasts forever boomer, you should learn to get over it...


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

none said:


> Give me a break. baby boomers are the most entitled group of individuals on the planet. The lived off 'the greatest generation' who built all the infrastructure, have lived in a period of peace and huge economic growth, were given free and competitive education, hogged into great pensions and job security and the icing on the cake extracted a 2 generations of housing gains JUST before they retire. Old person... PLEASE.
> 
> Now the oldies complain that they don't want to pay for education - grade 12 which they received is worth a post secondary diploma or a degree currently but "don't touch my health care or other entitlements". Ridiculous.


Before you throw Granny under the bus, you might want to ask who is putting you up to it, and what they are getting out of it. And what they have planned for you.

Hint: Granny was promised she would be taken care of when she got old, and paid taxes union dues and pension contributions on that basis. Now that she is retirement age, that money seems to have disappeared. You might want to ask where those billions of dollars disappeared to.

You may find it in the pockets of the people who outsourced your job to China but will bring it back if you will work 12 hours a day for $1.20 an hour. But they will promise you a nice pension if you work for them for 40 years without complaining.


----------



## 1980z28 (Mar 4, 2010)

gt_23 said:


> .
> 
> Nothing lasts forever boomer, you should learn to get over it...


+1


----------



## uptoolate (Oct 9, 2011)

Those in North America in the 50s and 60s did very well due to the circumstances they found themselves in. They benefited from the great sacrifices that they and others made (or had to endure) in the 30s and 40s. Most of the boomers have done very, very well as well. Probably, the best childhood ever experienced though job prospects and security not so good compared to those who belonged to the 'greatest' generation (of course, they had to survive to benefit). For the last 30 years we have been coasting and benefiting from cheap offshore labour. To the great benefit of a the few in the West, those with oil and the providers of cheap labour. 500 years worth of innovation and sacking the world's resources are being squandered on 'that cheap crap from China'. Yes, it may be wise to take Jim Rogers advice to move to Hong Kong and educate your children in Mandarin but probably not necessary as the Chinese are so quick to learn English. Power will continue to shift.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I agree with the concept that "entitlements" have gone too far.

Where I disagree is that I wouldn't call a benefit an "entitlement" if I am paying for it with my tax dollars.

I would call it an entitlement, if the benefit exceeded what the tax dollars I spend would support.

Therein lies the problem. We need to cut entitlements or raise the taxes to pay 100% of the cost............one or the other and for us to decide.

We can't keep borrowing the difference forever.

On the issue of benefiting from buying cheap crap from China.........have we really benefited when wages have stagnated to the point that cheap crap is all we can afford ?

We somehow managed to purchase whatever we needed from Canadian/US manufacturers before free trade was implemented.

Maybe we didn't buy as much, or were more selective, or looked after our stuff more carefully...........and often it just was better made and lasted longer.

Many members of my extended families still have dining room suites that are 50 years old. Try that with a particle board dining room suite sold today.

I have shoes that I purchased in the 1970s from Florsheim. Put a new heel on them and they are good to go.

Just saying...........I am not sure we have had much benefit from our trade with the Chinese.


----------



## Davis (Nov 11, 2014)

I'm not sure where people are getting the idea that "Granny paid into a fund all of her life and is now told that there's nothing left for her". OAS and GIS are paid out if current tax revenues, not a fund. And they are still being paid to seniors. A senior with no other income gets about $15,000 a year, and a couple get $23,000. That's much more than benefits for a person with disabilities who can't work, or someone who can't get work. Granny is still getting her pogey. And if she paid into CPP, she's getting that since CPP is solvent and will be for a long time yet.


----------



## Sherlock (Apr 18, 2010)

$15k or $23k for a couple is a pretty miserable existence. I'd like to see OAS and GIS increased for low income seniors. At the same time I'd like to see the OAS clawback threshold lowered. Did you guys read the story in the news a few days ago of the elderly couple in cornwall who pawned their wedding ring because they couldn't afford groceries?


----------



## My Own Advisor (Sep 24, 2012)

No I did not Sherlock. That is terrible and sad.


----------



## Davis (Nov 11, 2014)

I don't agree. $15,000 is a very modest existence, but not miserable. Keep in mind that this is for someone who has no other income, like CPP, so this is someone who has never worked. Someone who has worked would have a higher income, of course. A single person welfare in Ontario gets about $7000. Single person on disability support gets $11,500 or so. So OAS/GIS is not bad. You have to be in Canada for ten years to qualify though.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

^^^^

YMMV ... my co-worker considers his one-bedroom rental a steal of a deal for the area and would leave Granny with $5.4K for everything else.
Granny, the single person on welfare and on disability likely will have to be sharing with someone to have a hope.


Cheers


----------



## My Own Advisor (Sep 24, 2012)

$15,000 is not very much, even if that is after-tax. That is $1250 per month. 

Our property taxes are $350 per month now. 
Our hydro, gas, and Rogers bills together average about $300 per month and we don't have cable. 
Our home insurance, auto insurance and life insurance runs us about $200 per month, if I only factor in one car. 

I haven't eaten anything yet, I haven't driven my car anywhere yet, I have no clothes or healthcare expenses yet, nor have I traveled outside my home....and I'm supposed to live off of $100 per week?

That seems somewhat miserable to me hence I need to keep saving!


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

sags said:


> I am happy for our DB pensions coming in.............and sad for those people who took the commuted values.
> 
> I know one school principal who chose a $1,000,000 commuted value over his pension. He immediately lost a big whack to taxes, and then lost 40% of his remaining money in the stock market...


The only situation in which that decision works is if he dies early and had no 100% joint survivor option. Was the principal uniformed or just rash?

My nejghbour retired penniless. He had been profligate when he made money. He is in a nice seniors home, private room, and the government takes 80% of his entitlements every month.

His family have bought him a new TV and an cellular iPad so he lacks for nothing. He is 85.

So we do take care of our old and sick. I would not want it any other way.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

kcowan said:


> The only situation in which that decision works is if he dies early and had no 100% joint survivor option. Was the principal uniformed or just rash?
> 
> My nejghbour retired penniless. He had been profligate when he made money. He is in a nice seniors home, private room, and the government takes 80% of his entitlements every month.
> 
> ...


I believe he was informed. He just thought he could do better in the stock market than his pension would provide.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Keith...........you were a member of the old 55 Plus forum.

Don't you remember the poster who was ranting and sending letters and organizing petitions about being able to withdraw 100% of his commuted value from his LIRA ?

The Ontario government eventually did allow some withdrawal...........25% I believe, but that guy wanted it all.

If I recall correctly, that was while stock markets were soaring and just before the big crash.

I always wondered how that worked out, and hoped people didn't listen to him and lose their money.


----------



## Letran (Apr 7, 2014)

My Own Advisor said:


> $15,000 is not very much, even if that is after-tax. That is $1250 per month.
> 
> Our property taxes are $350 per month now.
> Our hydro, gas, and Rogers bills together average about $300 per month and we don't have cable.
> ...


The question is. 

IF it is miserable at 15k NOW, how about the next generation?
How much can they expect to get? 

With the working population in a decline we might be wishing that we get 15k by the time it's our time to retire.


----------



## Davis (Nov 11, 2014)

My Own Advisor said:


> $15,000 is not very much, even if that is after-tax. That is $1250 per month.
> 
> Our property taxes are $350 per month now.
> Our hydro, gas, and Rogers bills together average about $300 per month and we don't have cable.
> ...


Home ownership, car payments, life insurance -- you're looking at a middle-class lifestyle. The single person getting $15,000 from OAS/GIS isn't supporting a middle-class lifestyle. They've likely come off welfare (GIS is welfare for seniors, after all), so they've been struggling to get by on $7,000 a year, and now get $15,000. Their standard of living jumps up when they hit 65. 

If you're suggesting the all seniors should be able to afford home ownership, cars and life insurance regardless of whether they worked before they turned 65, you're going to need much higher taxes on the working middle class to support your seniors benefits.

But I am with you that I wouldn't want to try to survive on a welfare budget before or after 65. that's why I work and save.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

Letran said:


> ... IF it is miserable at 15k NOW, how about the next generation? ,,,
> With the working population in a decline we might be wishing that we get 15k by the time it's our time to retire.




Up thread said that the $15K is a zero income situation ... so if the current generation that has "woken up" to the issues where they aim for zero income - I expect a lot more problems ahead.


Then too, I wonder about where the boomers inheritances/wealth disappeared ...


Cheers


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

uptoolate said:


> Those in North America in the 50s and 60s did very well due to the circumstances they found themselves in. They benefited from the great sacrifices that they and others made (or had to endure) in the 30s and 40s. Most of the boomers have done very, very well as well. Probably, the best childhood ever experienced though job prospects and security not so good compared to those who belonged to the 'greatest' generation (of course, they had to survive to benefit). For the last 30 years we have been coasting and benefiting from cheap offshore labour. To the great benefit of a the few in the West, those with oil and the providers of cheap labour. 500 years worth of innovation and sacking the world's resources are being squandered on 'that cheap crap from China'. Yes, it may be wise to take Jim Rogers advice to move to Hong Kong and educate your children in Mandarin but probably not necessary as the Chinese are so quick to learn English. Power will continue to shift.


Where were all these great sacrificers when I needed help? I never saw any. Where were all the great secure well paid jobs? I never saw any of those either. Where were the cheap houses, the low interest rates? You may have benefited from cheap offshore labor, but it was my job you gave them.

This is all revisionist bullshit and does not bear the slightest resemblance to my life. I still want to know where these fairy tales are coming from?


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

Davis said:


> I'm not sure where people are getting the idea that "Granny paid into a fund all of her life and is now told that there's nothing left for her". OAS and GIS are paid out if current tax revenues, not a fund. And they are still being paid to seniors. A senior with no other income gets about $15,000 a year, and a couple get $23,000. That's much more than benefits for a person with disabilities who can't work, or someone who can't get work. Granny is still getting her pogey. And if she paid into CPP, she's getting that since CPP is solvent and will be for a long time yet.


That is not how it was sold. Granny was promised that if she contributed for 40 years that money would be invested and if she lived long enough, she would get a pension. But as soon as she reaches out for the money that was promised her they change the rules. Now it turns out they spent the money and there is nothing left.

Same with company pensions. Thousands of Canadians paid into company pension funds and were promised pensions by the company they worked for and the unions that represented them. They paid in for 20 years or more and planned their retirement accordingly, now the company they worked for has been bought out by another company or gone out of business and the money they put in is gone, and nobody seems to know where.

I know more than one person this has happened to. Nobody cares, the unions, the companies, the government, are all singing the same tune: serves you right for trusting us. You shouldn't have given us your money, you should have planned your retirement better.

Now they have you young people singing out of the same song book. I still have one question: if they can get you to throw Granny under the bus, what do you think they have planned for you?


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Rusty,

That's why the "tax the rich" chant is being taken up...those who did it themselves will soon have it taken away.


----------



## tenoclock (Jan 23, 2015)

The welfare state gives everyone a justification to blame everyone else for one's misery. oh well!


----------



## Davis (Nov 11, 2014)

Rusty, you're conflating CPP, which Granny contributed to, with OAS and GIS, which are paid by current taxpayers. Granny is still getting her CPP. It is solvent and is still paying the pensions that were promised. 90 percent of seniors get OAS. Only the very rich don't get it. I don't think we want to tax today's working people more so that we can give hand-out to the richest ten percent of seniors. GIS is a welfare program. People who get it probably didn't pay very much tax when they were working, if they were at all.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Davis said:


> Rusty, you're conflating CPP, which Granny contributed to, with OAS and GIS, which are paid by current taxpayers. Granny is still getting her CPP. It is solvent and is still paying the pensions that were promised. 90 percent of seniors get OAS. Only the very rich don't get it. I don't think we want to tax today's working people more so that we can give hand-out to the richest ten percent of seniors. GIS is a welfare program. People who get it probably didn't pay very much tax when they were working, if they were at all.


Granny paid into the OAS fund (a stand alone fund within the Consolidated Accounts) as well, through special taxes that were levied and continue today.

When the fund was eliminated and the government put the cash into general revenues, they assumed the liability to pay the OAS benefit.

Many people think the OAS is a gift from the government. It isn't and if they want to abolish it for future generations they should abolish the special taxes along with it.

Between the OAS getting qualifications extended 2 years...........and the EI fund being absorbed and later benefits were cut.......public pension fund surpluses being raided..........Canadians should be adamant that any future government keep their hands off the CPP fund.

It is easy to take the money today..............and in 40 years claim the government can no longer afford the benefits.

In my opinion all of these pension or insurance funds............should be totally hands off the government forever.


----------



## My Own Advisor (Sep 24, 2012)

I have no problems with CPP. It needs to stay or be expanded/increased actually. If we have GIS or a floor for senior income, why really OAS as well?


----------



## Sherlock (Apr 18, 2010)

My Own Advisor said:


> No I did not Sherlock. That is terrible and sad.


Here is the article I meant: http://abc7.com/society/cops-buy-ba...ter-he-pawned-it-to-pay-for-groceries/493479/


----------



## Davis (Nov 11, 2014)

The separate OAS was eliminated 40 years ago. Just how old is your very rich Granny? She can't have paid into it for very long before it was eliminated. The people who contributed most to the actual fund would have been reciving the full OAS until the clawback was introduced in 1989.

Since the separate fund was eliminated, OAS has been on a pay-as-you go basis - it is funded by current taxpayers through taxes, which include the increased amounts.

It is actually only 2% of seniors who have it fully clawed back, while 5% get a reduced benefit. I understand that for these people, it's not about the money, it's about the principle, because these people don't need the money after all.

I don't think that benefits for the richest 2% is an issue that many people will get excited about. If you want to make "let's help the very, very rich" your rallying slogan, go ahead. Just don't expect non-seniors struggling to pay the rent to rally behind you.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

I was responding to a poster who seemed to think everyone over the age of fifty is a self indulgent bum who has had everything handed to them on a silver plate, and therefore deserves to starve in their old age or be pushed out to sea on an ice floe.

I don't know where this idea got its start but it plays right into the hands of the crooks who have cleaned out pension plans across the country. Please don't tell me it doesn't happen because it does. I am referring specifically to private or company pension plans.

To be crystal clear, I was not referring to any specific person or pension. I was rebutting the idea that old people deserve to starve.


----------



## none (Jan 15, 2013)

I personally think everyone should have a guaranteed income of $25,000 (at least) after age 70 with clawbacks beginning after 40K (or less). I would happily pay more taxes to support such a program. I would never see any of this money.


----------



## Davis (Nov 11, 2014)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> I was responding to a poster who seemed to think everyone over the age of fifty is a self indulgent bum who has had everything handed to them on a silver plate, and therefore deserves to starve in their old age or be pushed out to sea on an ice floe.
> 
> I don't know where this idea got its start but it plays right into the hands of the crooks who have cleaned out pension plans across the country. Please don't tell me it doesn't happen because it does. I am referring specifically to private or company pension plans.
> 
> To be crystal clear, I was not referring to any specific person or pension. I was rebutting the idea that old people deserve to starve.


It is always better to provide specifics rather than asking other posters to just take your word for it. Thanks to OAS and GIS, old Canadians don't have to starve. I don't know what the Cornwall couple did with their $23,000 of handouts before they sold the wedding ring, but we can't stop people from handling their money badly.


----------



## Xoron (Jun 22, 2010)

brad said:


> Interest rates should always be compared with the inflation rate. Back when regular savings accounts were paying 5% and five-year GICs were paying 10% or more, inflation was in the double digits. You might actually be better off at today's rates; you were losing a lot of buying power from year to year if you kept your savings in an account earning 5%.


Exactly this. Interest and bond rates are only useful when compared to inflation.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

none said:


> I personally think everyone should have a guaranteed income of $25,000 (at least) after age 70 with clawbacks beginning after 40K (or less).
> I would happily pay more taxes to support such a program...


The question would be how to make sure the gov't did not redirect money out of the fund for other purposes.


Cheers


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

Davis said:


> ... It is actually only 2% of seniors who have it fully clawed back, while 5% get a reduced benefit ...


There's a lot being written up and a fair number posting here that they are thinking of liquidating their RRSP to avoid the OAS clawback for only 5% having it reduced.


Cheers


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

Davis said:


> It is always better to provide specifics rather than asking other posters to just take your word for it. Thanks to OAS and GIS, old Canadians don't have to starve. I don't know what the Cornwall couple did with their $23,000 of handouts before they sold the wedding ring, but we can't stop people from handling their money badly.


Once again I seem to have missed the point. There are a lot of young people who say they are not going to pay taxes so their elders can have a pension in their old age. They do not believe in intergenerational wealth transfer. They came to this conclusion as soon as they finished college and moved out of their parents' house. I have a feeling they will change their mind again when the old folks are near death and they start wondering who is going to get the house.


----------



## fplan (Feb 20, 2014)

I think govt wants to increase CPP to make sure it has enough to fund all boomers' CPP payout. After that they slowly increase the age or reduce the payout or both. I think govt should make their point clear that any body( who is under 45 ) paying into CPP can expect nothing from the fund.Then at least people can plan better. I think all the benefits introduced before or during the boomer generation will be gone for next generation.


----------



## Charlie (May 20, 2011)

CPP is funded. It is no more in danger than a company def ben plan.
OAS is income tested (possibly more stringent measures to come?).

Housing is crazy in the major cities -- no so much elsewhere.
Not so sure unemployment is worse than it was in the 80's. 

Not too many opportunities for women pre 1975. (this also affects men in two income families).
Employment standards are much better now.

There are whole post boomer industries now in tech and knowledge fields. Some are very well paying.

Not so sure those who bemoan loss of manufacturing jobs would want those jobs. Trades are under sought.

So some things are better. Others, much worse. 

All you can do is do give it your all. I missed many great opportunities in the 90's because I was thinking of the ones I'd missed that came before me.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

fplan said:


> I think govt wants to increase CPP to make sure it has enough to fund all boomers' CPP payout.


They have an odd way of doing it by telling the premiers "not now".




fplan said:


> ... I think govt should make their point clear that any body( who is under 45 ) paying into CPP can expect nothing from the fund.
> Then at least people can plan better ...


 ... not sure why this would be necessary ... but if this were to be implemented, those who will receive nothing should be exempt from contributing.




fplan said:


> ... I think all the benefits introduced before or during the boomer generation will be gone for next generation.


And there's been several cycles of "don't expect anything", "the pension is going broke" over the last several decades where despite the picture painted, there's money still being paid. 

IMO, taking this tact will encourage the politicians to loot the plan.


Cheers


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The CPP is growing so fast.........at 219 Billion as of March 2014...........it is more likely that benefits paid out should have been much higher than they have been.

Here are the figures and charts at the link.......

http://www.cppib.com/en/our-performance.html

In 2040......25 years from now when the boomer bubble is well into their retirement years and their numbers are in decline.........the fund is still trending upwards.

Either the actuaries are dead wrong.............or the boomer generation is getting ripped off on the returns on their investment into the CPP fund.

There can't be an upward trend while the boomers are collecting benefits, AND the fund is going to be broke at the same time.

Where is the dip.............the reversal of the trend ? 

In 30 years........40 years.......50 years ? That would be long after the boomers are no longer collecting benefits.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The doom and gloom crowd fretting over the Ontario Pension Plan............are saying the same things the opponents of the CPP said when it started.

The OPP will be overseen by very competent fund managers, and will produce the same results as the CPPIB have done.

It would be better to expand the CPP.............but a change in government will be needed to do that.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Are these the same competent fund managers who "routinely underperform the market" or, by some miracle are the extremely small minority who don't? Somehow I doubt the government found the good ones...

Second, just because you find an information chart, produced by the government, doesn't mean it's correct...Germany produced information saying they were winning the war as the Russians captured Berlin...

Third, if there really is a surplus in the fund, you can almost guarantee that the government will find some way to raid it like they've always done...


----------



## OhGreatGuru (May 24, 2009)

I believe the Chief Actuary over paranoid ideologues regarding the financial soundness of CPP. People who want to get out of CPP because "I can manage my money much better, thank-you" are like the principal described in an earlier post who took his $1M pension transfer instead of a pension, and then went broke.


----------



## birdman (Feb 12, 2013)

Gotta love the CPP as it eliminates the investment risk if I was to manage the funds in my own portfolio.


----------



## fplan (Feb 20, 2014)

recession or couple years of bear market will reduce the balance. we are 6 years of bull market and everything seems fine. next decade many people will be getting CPP payout. After if Govt thinks fund is not enough then they simply increase the age requirement. Is there any guarantee that fund will last for many years or govt wont increase age?. its not about who is better investor . Its all about giving control to the govt.


----------



## fplan (Feb 20, 2014)

Its not about who is better investor. Whats the guarantee that govt wont change CPP collecting rules 20 yrs down the line.I am fine for increase in CPP contributions but I dont want to be in a situation that ohh sorry.. you are out of luck.. All people before you depleted the fund.. now you are on your own.. or better yet.. hey CPP was doing so great, so we borrowed and put it towards other programs..now there is no fund to pay you..


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

Recent posters re/ the CPP may find the CPP Invesmtent Board's site of interest: http://www.cppib.com/en/home.html.
Particularly the link to Who We Are > Governance> Independence & Accountability.


----------

