# Spend it if you got it. You can't take it with you.



## RachII (Jan 3, 2011)

Two years ago while my neighbours 40 year old son was dying of cancer he gave me the above advice. About two months later he too was diagnosed and died within four months - before his son! Balance and moderation are important in everything. Preparing for your financial future/retirement is important - something I know will never be argued on this forum! But at what point is enough enough? And what do you financially responsible savers say to people living the advice above? Thoughts?


----------



## none (Jan 15, 2013)

This is something I struggle with. Although I have decided to leave my son close to nothing after he becomes an adult and finished UNiversity - i still have a hard time with 'what is enough'.

I'm in a pretty hardcore austerity lifestyle right now and hope to train myself to spend more come the next year. I don't think it's going to be all that easy.

At this point - if all works out - at 65 I should be able to retire with a $2400 a month indexed pension and about 1million of which >50% will be non-registered. Surely that must be enough. ight... RIGHT?????


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

RachII said:


> Two years ago while my neighbours 40 year old son was dying of cancer he gave me the above advice. About two months later he too was diagnosed and died within four months - before his son! Balance and moderation are important in everything. Preparing for your financial future/retirement is important - something I know will never be argued on this forum! But at what point is enough enough? And what do you financially responsible savers say to people living the advice above? Thoughts?


The problem is that most wages arent enough to spend some now, save a bit and have enough for retirement, even if the family. There are so many immediate expenses when raising a family too and unexpected surprises. Most people are more scared of being 80 and running out of money.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

Just read Prince the Musician dead at 57. This post was very prescient.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

none said:


> at 65 I should be able to retire with a $2400 a month indexed pension and about 1million of which >50% will be non-registered. Surely that must be enough. ight... RIGHT?????


It is more than enough...I spend like a drunken sailor last 6 years of my retirement, my net worth is still at all time highs and I have no pension like you...yours is worth north of another million.


----------



## birdman (Feb 12, 2013)

I expect most people struggle with this and I always say that it all depends on "how you want to live your life" which when you think about it is a difficult question. Do you want a lavish lifestyle? Expensive hobbies? At what age do you wish to retire? Do you want to leave a legacy? etc. Its all about choices and of course money and "how much is enough" often has something to do with it. I don't think there is one answer that suits everyone and it is just something that you (and your spouse if applicable) have to figure out. Are material possessions eg "stuff" important, what about your home, etc. I don't think others can answer this for you. For my wife and I it just worked out well and I was able to retire at 56 (wife never worked to speak of) and we can pretty well do what we want and we also have some pretty pricey sporting hobbies/activities which no doubt will come to an end one day (current 70 and 69 yrs). Of course I am always wondering how long we will be around for and "how much is enough" and where we will spend our last couple of years but I think there is enough for that and a legacy of sorts-probably the house and some $$$. In saying this, new vehicles, expensive dinners out, etc are not something which are hugely important. Dinners with friends, family, sporting activities, some travel, etc. and time with children and grandchildren are what makes us tick.


----------



## yyz (Aug 11, 2013)

Nobody can accurately predict how long they are going to live so how do you " spend it if you got it" without planning for the future ?


----------



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

Sounds good but what if you survive? What if you live to 80 and outlive your money. Too old and sick to work, trying to survive on Old Age Pension, then what do you do?

On the other hand if I drop dead tomorrow I won't care. What I spent or didn't spend in this life, what I leave won't matter at all. So to me it makes sense to plan as if I will live to be 100.


----------



## CalgaryPotato (Mar 7, 2015)

I think there has to be a happy balance. I'd say most people live too much in the moment and don't worry enough about the future.

However I know sometimes reading the frugality and retirement forums of this community I do wonder what some of the people are saving up for. Aiming to save every last penny for retirement. For me I've had way too many relatives die or get very ill before retirement or within 2 years of retirement to consider that the primary place I'm going to get my enjoyment in life. Living to 90, being healthy, but having to live off of CPP & OAS for my last few years is what I'd consider a minor issue in the big picture of life.


----------



## 6811 (Jan 1, 2013)

frase said:


> Dinners with friends, family, sporting activities, some travel, etc. and time with children and grandchildren are what makes us tick.


Amen to that!


----------



## pwm (Jan 19, 2012)

I'm with Rusty. I've got more money to spend now than in any time in my life, but there are not many material things that I want any more. My goal is to be retired as long as I worked, so for me that means I need to make it to 90. (I quit at 55 after 35 years).
As you get older your desire for more possessions diminishes. I see that in my two grandsons aged 9 and 11. When you talk to them it's all about getting this new toy or that new video game etc. That is normal for children but as one matures one realizes that material things don't bring real and lasting happiness. Some people unfortunately will never understand that fact and for them there will never be enough "stuff".


----------



## none (Jan 15, 2013)

Planning like this is where an indexed pension really really shines. Although my pension will be kind of crap - $2400 a month (would barely cover rent) it allows me to plan to eat through the entire principle of my other retirement savings and if I live longer than expected at least I have a pretty decent baseline that I will never drop under.


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

none said:


> Planning like this is where an indexed pension really really shines. Although my pension will be kind of crap - $2400 a month (would barely cover rent) it allows me to plan to eat through the entire principle of my other retirement savings and if I live longer than expected at least I have a pretty decent baseline that I will never drop under.



But I would expect you'll also have CPP and OAP on top, both indexed, which alleviates the crappiness to some extent. Well, maybe not OAP, I expect it gets clawed back except for those with no other income.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

pwm said:


> as one matures one realizes that material things don't bring real and lasting happiness.


You dont own a sailboat it seems!


----------



## none (Jan 15, 2013)

Mukhang pera said:


> But I would expect you'll also have CPP and OAP on top, both indexed, which alleviates the crappiness to some extent. Well, maybe not OAP, I expect it gets clawed back except for those with no other income.


yeah, I'm not totally sure about that. For some reason I think my pension and CPP get rolled in together for some reason. I should really figure that out.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

It is a balance of enjoying life as one goes along and saving enough for retirement. My suggestion for those in their 30's and 40's is to build enough to be able to have a middle class retirement. One can do a lot more with $80k coming in (today's dollars) than $60k or $40k. But there is nothing wrong with a $60k retirement either. Project that out to age 60 to find out what those dollar amounts will be at that time, factor in CPP and OAS (and any DB pension) and then save enough so that a 3-3.5% SWR will take you out to age 90. That is about the best most of the middle class can/should aim for.

Some of us were more fortunate to be beyond the middle class, able to put away larger amounts of money, for a larger endpoint, e.g. $100k/yr cash flow, and pick their point of retirement, e.g. 55 yrs of age...or 57 or whatever. A person will "know" when they get to that spot that says... I can now have a comfortable retirement. I made that call at age 57 and now at age 67, I can confirm it has worked as planned so far. I don't worry much about starting to eat into capital... If by age 80, I know that by selling my house, I should be able to fund 10 yrs at least in a retirement home of sorts. That is good enough for me since at age 80, I will definitely be spending less than I do now (negligible expensive travel, no more expensive toys, little interest in material things) and by age 90, I will be happy just to wake up each morning. My mother spent virtually nothing beyond age 85 and died at a ripe age of 96.


----------



## treva84 (Dec 9, 2014)

AltaRed said:


> It is a balance of enjoying life as one goes along and saving enough for retirement. My suggestion for those in their 30's and 40's is to build enough to be able to have a middle class retirement.


As a 30's something member of the working class, I find this thread interesting. My wife and I drive old cars and we live a middle class lifestyle that actually doesn't reflect our household income - we pride ourselves on being frugal savers and we are always looking ahead to the future. Yes, I would love to buy a newer car and yes, my wife would love to travel more but we are also planning for retirement in 25 years. 

Recently I was thinking about what would happen if I, or my wife, was to die before retirement. Would I be laying on my death bed thinking, "ugh I really should have purchased that beamer" or would she be thinking "ugh we really should have taken that trip to Asia". Probably not, to be honest. Cars and vacations are fun, but their value diminishes with time. I think the value of financial independence increases with time. 

With that being said, I think most people of my generation are spending it as if they got it, when in reality they don't. The stats around the average household debt levels in Canada support that as well.


----------



## TomB19 (Sep 24, 2015)

I'm taken back by some of the comments in here. Are you guys netting 30% per year on your investments, or something?

What is a realistic average?

I wouldn't dream of retiring on $1M of exchange traded investments, although that would go a long way toward augmenting rental income, pensions, etc.

I'd love to quit my job but I'm 49 and I might have the misfortune of living another 40 years. Even if I don't, my wife might. ... so I pack my lunch every day and go to work.


----------



## none (Jan 15, 2013)

I use 7% before inflation for financial projections.


----------



## Saniokca (Sep 5, 2009)

treva84 said:


> Recently I was thinking about what would happen if I, or my wife, was to die before retirement. Would I be laying on my death bed thinking, "ugh I really should have purchased that beamer" or would she be thinking "ugh we really should have taken that trip to Asia". Probably not, to be honest. Cars and vacations are fun, but their value diminishes with time. I think the value of financial independence increases with time.


Lately I think about it this way: if my wife or I die, the other will be well taken care off with the money we saved up. We are also expecting a daughter soon so I keep thinking that if I kick the bucket my wife won't be a single mother who has to choose between working her butt off and spending time with the kid. I know there is insurance for that but saved up capital is even better since neither of us "has to die".


----------



## jargey3000 (Jan 25, 2011)

kinda agree with Rusty....


----------



## Itchy54 (Feb 12, 2012)

Oh, if we could see into the future....

When I was 49 I got really sick, sudden onset. My pancreas got very unhappy and tried to kill me for no reason at all. When that happens they just watch you...there is no fix, just crossed fingers. 16 days in the hospital, 2 month tube feeding, a surgery with a fairly crappy survival rate and another long recovery gave hubby and I a very eye opening experience. As soon as I could we hopped a plane to Mexico and have done so every year since for as long as we can.. This is a life celebration.
That was ten years ago. Since this was idiopathic they cannot tell me if it will happen again. You just never know. I do all I can to remain amazing  but .....
So, spend and save your money....

Wish my dad had spent more of his money. Now in a care home his life revolves around tv and meals...and he did nothing for the ten previous years, didn't buy the car he really wanted, didn't travel....nothing. That's a waste. Especially when his pensions covered all his expenses and then some. Shame...

Hubs and I just retired....so happy. Not rich but happy!


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

none said:


> I use 7% before inflation for financial projections.


That is richer than most financial planners would assume for a somewhat balanced portfolio over a future 30 year period. Historical returns are no longer with us.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/glob...ealistic-return-expectations/article24574135/

http://www.financialplanningforcana...t-returns-why-these-new-guidelines-are-golden

The bulls*** in those articles though is the outrageous fees shown in the portfolio return table. That is where DIYers can do much better with perhaps 10-20 basis points in fees....getting much closer to gross returns (before taxes)

Added: I generally used 6% nominal as my rule of thumb for a relatively aggressive 70/30 portfolio over the years....but would reduce that now by at least one percentage point (bull market in FI is gone).


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

Mukhang pera said:


> But I would expect you'll also have CPP and OAP on top, both indexed, which alleviates the crappiness to some extent. Well, maybe not OAP, I expect it gets clawed back except for those with no other income.


I presume OAP is really OAS.

OAS starts to be clawed back at something like $72K of income (I believe CPP is not included in the income for the OAS clawback test) and does not completely disappear until income hits something like $116K. 
http://retirehappy.ca/minimizing-old-age-security-clawback/

Lots gets written about the OAS clawback but only something like 5% (if I recall correctly), completely lose the entire OAS payment.


I will have to dig out the details but I seem to recall that some DB pensions will reduce their payout as CPP starts to be paid. So it may not be DB pension + CPP but more of a level income.


Cheers


*PS*

There is a lot of variation so having the details of one's particular DB pension is important.


----------



## none (Jan 15, 2013)

AltaRed said:


> That is richer than most financial planners would assume for a somewhat balanced portfolio over a future 30 year period. Historical returns are no longer with us.
> .


Possibly but they are just guessing. I base my 7 on historical performance which is really all the data we have so might as well have at 'er. Of course, any financial plan that is so sensitive as to fall apart over a 1% point isn't worth very much either. Further, having 1 million at retirement is largely arbitrary too.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Sure, but then there is tax drag too. Gross numbers don't mean a lot unless taken into context. $1 million in an RRSP or RRIF is a lot less than $1 million in a non-registered account, with perhaps half to two-thirds of it unrealized gains.

It is hard for anyone in their 30's and 40's to get too precise about anything. Better to deal with some macro numbers and only when one is within 10 years of 'potential' retirement is it worth taking a closer look at AT cash flows. That is the reason for calculators like FIRECalc (adjusted for Canadian use) or RRIFmetic, or similar.


----------



## lonewolf (Jun 12, 2012)

The 2 biggest expenses over the average person life span is taxes & paying interest ( maybe these low interest rates paying interest will change) I m with Einstein on his theory regarding compound interest those that understand it make it those that don't understand pay it. Don't really like the idea @ slaving away to pay interest when instead you can make interest. I like to use money as seed corn to be harvested. My focus has been on money as seed corn & stretching dollars for best value with in reason. Just working & spending money that adds no value to life just cant get into.


----------



## RachII (Jan 3, 2011)

Lot of interesting and varied responses which I suppose should be expected to a question that probably has no absolute answers. I agree with none that it should be something we "struggle with". Itchy I think your personal insight is where I am at too! At what point does the pursuit of this "security" lessen the quality of life in the present. I'm not saying quality of life = material things. Frase's comment about family and friends is probably about the only thing that seems certain about this in my opinion. But memories with those important people and personal satisfaction also comes from hobbies, toys, vacations, etc. My wife and I are not always on the same page when it comes to spending money. But at 46 with no debt and 7 years left on the mortgage with an indexed pension but limited RRSP's, why should I keep saying to her "lets wait until next year to go to Europe"???


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

It is important to make choices on where one spends discretionary income (after ensuring you pay yourself first into retirement savings/investment). For one's mental health, it is important to have a good vacation every year, but not necessarily an expensive one.... Maybe a more expensive one every 5 years. For some, designer clothes are key, even for the children. Really now..... Joe Fresh is just perfectly fine for preteen and then draw some limits thereafter. A smartphone is good for at least 5 years. Etc, etc. It is these kinds of choices that will leave a lot more discretionary income for vacations, dining out with friends, going to that Rolling Stones concert, etc.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

For a lot of people the thread title.........."spend it if you got it, you can't take it with you" could also say "spend it if you got it, you will never have enough to retire anyways".


----------



## Daniel A. (Mar 20, 2011)

It is somewhat important to plan for the future, living in today even more so. 

I've known a few that died to soon putting off enjoying what they had only to leave it for someone else to enjoy.


----------



## 1980z28 (Mar 4, 2010)

Interesting thoughts

Having saved enough cash to retire at 56,I have enough until 100 as I plan to live until that time 2060

With appox 24k per year plus as needed

For me it is very hard to spend cash just because I have it work so hard and long to get it,I will most likely not last for another 44 years,so the cash and assets will go to my children and homeless shelter

Does it make sense to keep saving money in my retirement,been doing it my lifetime,hard to change,so it goes


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

It is a dilemma ... on one hand, people die young, on the other hand - one of the residents at a local nursing home looked at his parents generation plus his older brothers then concluded he should spend freely as most were gone between forty to fifty. If I recall correctly, his is about to celebrate his 85th birthday.


Cheers


----------



## TomB19 (Sep 24, 2015)

1980z28 said:


> For me it is very hard to spend cash just because I have it work so hard and long to get it...


Amen.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

1980z28 said:


> ... For me it is very hard to spend cash just because I have it work so hard and long to get it ...


For me, it depends on what it for ... $75 a week of after tax dollar for StarBucks coffees by my co-workers, where they had access to a coffee maker to brew their own made no sense to me.


Cheers


----------



## 1980z28 (Mar 4, 2010)

Eclectic12 said:


> For me, it depends on what it for ... $75 a week of after tax dollar for StarBucks coffees by my co-workers, where they had access to a coffee maker to brew their own made no sense to me.
> 
> 
> Cheers


My car is 36 years old,my suv is 12 years old,my last suv was 17 years old when I traded it in

But I do buy a lot of running shoes,,as I run up to 10k per day,doctor suggest that I walk instead of run,,,I will start this weekend to walk the 10k to see if that save on shoes


----------



## BC Eddie (Feb 2, 2014)

none said:


> ... I base my 7 on historical performance which is really all the data we have so might as well have at 'er.


So how many years does your "historical performance" cover? If it goes back beyond 2008 then I will truly be impressed.


----------



## mrPPincer (Nov 21, 2011)

easier on the footwear and on the knee joints to walk.
I walk with two hiking groups about 6k on tuesdays & 8-ish k on fridays when I'm not working on those days.

Might start to join hikes on other days too eventually, seems to help motivate me to get out there when there's a schedule to stick to with a group, also it's a social thing, we meet for coffee afterwards.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Eclectic12 said:


> For me, it depends on what it for ... $75 a week of after tax dollar for StarBucks coffees by my co-workers, where they had access to a coffee maker to brew their own *made no sense to me.
> *
> Cheers


 ... it would also depends on the perception of value by the consumer ... your "co-worker" may see that there's better value with getting StarBucks coffee than with having to make coffee themselves in terms of time saved, the SBX chic-factor and the fact they don't need to "save" their money, especially over a cup of java.


----------



## Islenska (May 4, 2011)

It almost jumps out at me, being 63 that financial needs shrink dramatically , more a personal taste in not at all needing things anymore. We never budgeted but always did esp. travel with little worry about prices within reason.

So for me to jump into "spending" isn't in the cards, have enough resources on hand for regular living, that is good enough.

p/s I would like to buy a Group of Seven painting though sometime.....


----------



## 1980z28 (Mar 4, 2010)

mrPPincer said:


> easier on the footwear and on the knee joints to walk.
> I walk with two hiking groups about 6k on tuesdays & 8-ish k on fridays when I'm not working on those days.
> 
> Might start to join hikes on other days too eventually, seems to help motivate me to get out there when there's a schedule to stick to with a group, also it's a social thing, we meet for coffee afterwards.


Great to keep moving and to love to be outside,when you have friends that also take part,it is great,I am also in a pool and dart leagues,excess to ?????,when I get back to newfie land will love the boating,fishing,wood cutting,I could alway`s use the help,free board


----------



## mrPPincer (Nov 21, 2011)

1980z28 said:


> Great to keep moving and to love to be outside,when you have friends that also take part,it is great,I am also in a pool and dart leagues,excess to ?????,when I get back to newfie land will love the boating,fishing,wood cutting,I could alway`s use the help,free board


I think I'd like to take you up on that sometime, I cut all my own firewood already, so no problem there 
Never been to Newfoundland before, closest was Nova Scotia in basic training in the 80's.


----------



## 1980z28 (Mar 4, 2010)

mrPPincer said:


> I think I'd like to take you up on that sometime, I cut all my own firewood already, so no problem there
> Never been to Newfoundland before, closest was Nova Scotia in basic training in the 80's.


I tried to get into the armed forces but was refused because I was and still am blind in one eye

I will be there in april 2017,I will pick you and wife up at airport only 15 mins away,will put you to work right away or not,,,,have lots of room


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

Eclectic12 said:


> I presume OAP is really OAS.


You presume correctly. I somehow thought it was called "Old Age Pension". At 70 I expect to get CPP of about $1,000 a month or so. Doubt I'll be able to collect OAS. There's a penalty to be paid for working hard and saving. And also for continuing to work. Unlike almost everyone else on this forum, who start looking to retire as soon as leaving high school, I enjoy my "work", which means it's not really work at all. I'll "retire" only if ill health forces it upon me. I have already scaled back how much I "work", and might cut back some more in a few years, but for now, I have a good balance. Even if it paid no income, I would want to continue my work at some level.


----------



## 1980z28 (Mar 4, 2010)

Mukhang pera said:


> You presume correctly. I somehow thought it was called "Old Age Pension". At 70 I expect to get CPP of about $1,000 a month or so. Doubt I'll be able to collect OAS. There's a penalty to be paid for working hard and saving. And also for continuing to work. Unlike almost everyone else on this forum, who start looking to retire as soon as leaving high school, I enjoy my "work", which means it's not really work at all. I'll "retire" only if ill health forces it upon me. I have already scaled back how much I "work", and might cut back some more in a few years, but for now, I have a good balance. Even if it paid no income, I would want to continue my work at some level.


IS there anyone one this site going to need it,just a though


----------



## none (Jan 15, 2013)

Mukhang pera said:


> You presume correctly. I somehow thought it was called "Old Age Pension". At 70 I expect to get CPP of about $1,000 a month or so. Doubt I'll be able to collect OAS. There's a penalty to be paid for working hard and saving. And also for continuing to work. Unlike almost everyone else on this forum, who start looking to retire as soon as leaving high school, I enjoy my "work", which means it's not really work at all. I'll "retire" only if ill health forces it upon me. I have already scaled back how much I "work", and might cut back some more in a few years, but for now, I have a good balance. Even if it paid no income, I would want to continue my work at some level.


That's not what OAS is - it has nothing to do with working hard or not.

http://retirehappy.ca/the-differences-between-cpp-and-oas/


----------



## mars (Mar 11, 2014)

I've been tracking my spending over the last couple of years to see what I spend money on and I was surprised at how little I actually spent. As I was tracking my spending I didn't change my spending habits as I wanted to get a true picture of spending. When I look out to retirement, hopefully not far off, I don't think my spending will change all that much. I played golf in the summer, at least 1 round a week if not 2 or 3, went on 3 trips during the year, went out to eat, met up with friends for drinks at a bar which is more expensive than getting together at home. Even with all that my spending was still under $40k. When I took a closer look I figure my spending on travel could go down or increase the number of trips in retirement just by being able to take advantage of last minute deals as opposed to having to plan around work vacations. Golf may or may not go down, but I figure eventually age will catch up and I will not physically be able to play as much.

I also have a brother who is about 25 years older than me and is retired. He semi retired when he was 50 with a full pension credited at 35 years of full time work and even in retirement continued to receive health care coverage by the military. He went into the military at a young age and got lucky with a couple of years buy out as the military was downsizing at the time. He wasn't sure if his pension and other income would be enough (he had no debt, a paid off house, a new car, and both kids out of the house and working) so he decided to continue working. Now that he is 73 he has told me that he should have just packed it in and enjoyed life when he left the military. Him and his wife still travel and enjoy what they can but he is just not as mobile as he use to be and could have enjoyed the travel a lot more when he was younger. 

As others have said, the right time to retire and the right amount you need varies depending on the individual. What is important to you and how much is it going to cost. I figure if I could generate a $40k income without counting on CPP or other government income, I would be able to live the life I want. However, this doesn't mean that is the right number for anyone else.


----------



## Karen (Jul 24, 2010)

Eclectic12 said:


> ...(I believe CPP is not included in the income for the OAS clawback test)...


I don't think that's correct, Eclectic12. My CPP is certainly included in my income for calculating the amount of my OAS clawback. The only income that isn't included in that calculation is any earnings in my TFSA


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Karen said:


> I don't think that's correct, Eclectic12. My CPP is certainly included in my income for calculating the amount of my OAS clawback. The only income that isn't included in that calculation is any earnings in my TFSA


You are correct. CPP is pension income just like DB pension income, just like RRIF payments, or employment income, or dividends, cap gains, etc.


----------



## 1980z28 (Mar 4, 2010)

no problem

Just apply,for what you are or should get

It will solve allllll prrroblemsss


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

None, in response to my comment: "Doubt I'll be able to collect OAS. There's a penalty to be paid for working hard and saving", you corrected me.



none said:


> That's not what OAS is - it has nothing to do with working hard or not.
> 
> http://retirehappy.ca/the-differences-between-cpp-and-oas/


I commented as I did because of this statement on a website that looks a lot like a legitimate Government of Canada website:

"If your net world income exceeds the threshold amount ($71,592 for 2014), you have to repay part or your entire OAS pension. Part or your entire OAS pension is reduced as a monthly recovery tax." The url is:

http://www.esdc.gc.ca/en/cpp/oas/recovery_tax.page?

So, I am apparently in error in believing that if one has worked hard and has secured a high income for one's retirement years, the OAS will be clawed back. I am pleased that you have got me sorted out on that score. I'll take your word that there is no such penalty for having an income over $71,592, and the website information I dug up is false.


----------



## none (Jan 15, 2013)

Your mistake is misinterpreting what OAS is for. You are pretty much complaining having to put money into the health care system and then get hit by a bus rather than having a long painful and expensive illness. It makes no sense.

OAS is a government insurance policy to take care of those otherwise not able to take care of themselves. It has absolutely nothing to do with how hard you worked.

It's similar to me complaining about our health care system having to take care of fatties when I take good are of myself physically. It's kind of a dumb argument.


----------



## Karen (Jul 24, 2010)

I find it hard to understand why none says (in post #2) that he plans to leave his son "next to nothing..." My attitude is very different; I have always told my daughters that I don't feel I have an obligation to leave them anything - that my obligation is to have enough money in the last years to look after my own needs and not to be a drain on them - but that I hope to have enough left over to leave a worthwhile amount to them. And, unless something really devastating happens to me before the time comes, I will be able to do that. That gives me great pleasure, and I can't imagine why everyone wouldn't want to be able to do that.

I live a very simple lifestyle, but that's for a combination of choice and health reasons. I could afford to live more extravagantly than I do, but my health doesn't allow me to travel very far, and I have everything I need in the way of personal possessions. I don't hesitate to spend money on something I really want, but my wants are pretty limited these days. In the meantime, it gives me a lot of pleasure to be able to add to my savings every month and to picture in my mind how much that money will mean to my kids after I'm gone.


----------



## none (Jan 15, 2013)

Because my legacy to my son will be to give him the life skills to act and operate as an adult. That's my job as a parent - not to leave him a handout after I die, and he will be better off as an adult if he knows how to stand on his own two feet rather than expect a handout when I die.

Of course, it's different before he's done his training and/or has become an adult .

BUT --- we all buy things with the money they have -- in essence you are buying the good feeling you get when thinking about leaving your kids cash. That's all right. I might just spend my cash on booze and hookers. To each his own.


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

none said:


> Your mistake is misinterpreting what OAS is for. You are pretty much complaining having to put money into the health care system and then get hit by a bus rather than having a long painful and expensive illness. It makes no sense.
> 
> OAS is a government insurance policy to take care of those otherwise not able to take care of themselves. It has absolutely nothing to do with how hard you worked.
> 
> It's similar to me complaining about our health care system having to take care of fatties when I take good are of myself physically. It's kind of a dumb argument.


I would say that anyone with a retirement income in excess of $71,000/yr. is quite capable of taking care of themselves. I can see no compelling and cogent reason to pay full OAS to someone at that income level and take it away from those over. I do not see the references to the health care system as a good analogy.


----------



## none (Jan 15, 2013)

Well I do agree that OAS clawbacks would more appropriately be based around 42K or something. 72K does seem like they are missing the point.


----------



## Karen (Jul 24, 2010)

none said:


> Your mistake is misinterpreting what OAS is for. You are pretty much complaining having to put money into the health care system and then get hit by a bus rather than having a long painful and expensive illness. It makes no sense.
> 
> OAS is a government insurance policy to take care of those otherwise not able to take care of themselves. It has absolutely nothing to do with how hard you worked.


I think Mukhang Pera was being sarcastic, none. He (she?), like many other Canadian retirees, including me, don't feel it's right that they saved money for their retirement when many of their friends and relatives were spending theirs as fast as it came in, only to find themselves punished for that by being denied their OAS.

Re your comment that OAS is a government insurance policy to take care of those not able to take of themselves, I think that idea depends on what generation you are a member of. That seems to be the case now, but my generation (I'll be 73 next month) grew up taking it for granted that everybody would receive OAS once they turned 65. I have lost most of mine, and I don't complain about it because I don't need it to live comfortably, but I can understand why some people resent it being clawed back. And it's not just the OAS; people in my income bracket not only lose most if not all of their OAS, they also lose the senior's exemption on their income tax, so the total consequences of having made saving for our retirement a priority turns out to be quite significant.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

AltaRed said:


> Karen said:
> 
> 
> > I don't think that's correct, Eclectic12. My CPP is certainly included in my income for calculating the amount of my OAS clawback. The only income that isn't included in that calculation is any earnings in my TFSA
> ...


I'll have to find the reference ... it makes sense the CPP would be included so maybe it was GIS?

(That's the trouble with getting old ... :biggrin


Cheers


----------



## none (Jan 15, 2013)

I just think it's a silly thing to complain about when you consider the choices:

1) Have seniors live in extreme poverty;
2) Give everyone OAS with no income adjustment and raise taxes on higher income people to compensate - which would ultimately have the same effect as the clawback.

It's like we should give EVERYONE wellfare whether they need it or not. It's stupid


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

none, your choice to just give your kids "life skills" will not be enough in the future. The future will belong to the asset owners.

The richest people in the world (the ones you dont hear about in the news) have legacy assets that have been compounding for hundreds of years.

If you think a person will be able to "make it" with a little pluck and perseverance in the next generation, you are mistaken.


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

none said:


> Well I do agree that OAS clawbacks would more appropriately be based around 42K or something. 72K does seem like they are missing the point.


Thank you for that fair-minded concession. Thus we are not all that much in disagreement.

Karen is right about the "resentment". Hence my comment about seeming to be punished for working hard and managing to have a good retirement for myself while others, who have earned well and could have prepared, are seemingly being rewarded for their profligacy. 

I note that both none and Karen live in BC, as do I. BC has long had a home owner grant program for property tax. But, if you have worked hard and bought a nice place, you are denied the grant. It starts to disappear around the $1.2 million mark in house value. In all the years I lived in Vancouver, I never received a good explanation for why my taxes on my west side house were just about double the taxes on a comparable east side house. Those taxes go to pay for things such as schools, police, fire protection, garbage collection, street lighting, roads, etc. Well, I never sent twice as many kids to school as the average east sider, never called the police or fire department twice as often, did not throw out twice as much garbage or make twice the use of street lights and roads. 

Then, as a double whammy, the province came up with a scheme to take away the HOG, for those who have a nice place and are considered rich, I suppose. All of this no doubt makes those with modest homes and big stock market portfolios feel good about their choices. The way governments in Canada are going, it won't be long before they impose a capital tax, like the former corporate capital tax in BC. We'll all be taxed on the value of our assets in addition to all the other taxes we pay.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

none said:


> Well I do agree that OAS clawbacks would more appropriately be based around 42K or something. 72K does seem like they are missing the point.


The problem is the Feds call OAS a pension, as in Old Age Security Pension when in fact it is an income supplement program. The way to really handle it is via means tested income like GIS and the HST/GST credit. Don't pay it out and then claw it back. Payouts should be graduated based on prior year's income tax returns. Indeed, take away OAS altogether and boost the GIS program instead. OAS was always intended to help keep seniors out of poverty. It is simply constructed bass ackwards.


----------



## mrPPincer (Nov 21, 2011)

1980z28 said:


> I tried to get into the armed forces but was refused because I was and still am blind in one eye


ok, so here's what you missed more or less.. (this was actually filmed in 1991 so, about a decade after the time when you or I would have been in there; I was in during the early 80's; eg. I was trained with the FNC1 or FNC2 rifle as opposed to the C7 rifle in the vids), also because the training became softer over time, it's not exactly what you would have experienced, but very close.

For example, in part 4, Morning Inspection, that nice female master corporal would not have been present in the barracks, it would have been some male master corporal screaming in your face, possibly spraying spittle & almost having a conniption lol.

There was no male/female integration at that time, (and no females were even in the combat arms trades then), although males and females were trained on the same base, so there was some contact when time was available, but we generally slept only two hours or so because all that kit had to be perfect and the entire barracks had to be spotless so you worked hours into the night every night, after 12 hours of 'training'.

This was only the basic training, at that time designed, more or less to weed out those who would crack under extreme pressure, as I see it anyways.

I did my full contract with them & went on to do other things, but I think all & all it did have an impact on me and help shape me, I think it helped make me a better person, more well-equipped to deal with other people (which, granted, is still not what I'd always consider one of my major skillsets heh.. :stupid.

anyways, here's what I could find..

it's in tiny pieces and all of them may not be there because they aren't even on the original poster's site anymore, but as a bonus I've included a link at the bottom to a bunch of his fav. 80's youtube music vids from his site 

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ic5uQ24wP7I
2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_82RbMMMtCY
3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bG6wEJMH4s
4. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4z9V53Geikw
5. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_m-CSBNmHgU
6. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIyOuJ90AHM
7. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZhm36XxYk4
8. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozon_XzpjPg
9. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAzohfRmSW4
10. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qj35IM4K1aM
11. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Wa_H0b4--s
12. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yB8MRlMiRU
13. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvn9kPvnlNk

Seems really retro doesn't it?, the format.. even though it was done almost a decade after I was through there. Am I getting old?? .. nah

anyways, here's the big-haired 80's /90's playlist from his site, as promised 
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6-35XbviArah_QJD0NTc17yS5QJjfFMe
__



> I will be there in april 2017,I will pick you and wife up at airport only 15 mins away,will put you to work right away or not,,,,have lots of room


sad to say I've been batch'ing it for the last 13 years (which is probably a good portion of why I can live so spartan, but if I do have a change of circumstance to the better, significant-other-wise, I'd be more than happy to bring her on the visit). 

Otherwise it's just me and the dogs, probably overland & over the ferry & I'd probably buy a cheap van to live in for the trip.
(but I'd bring my own chainsaw if I didn't fly).


----------



## Daniel A. (Mar 20, 2011)

none said:


> Your mistake is misinterpreting what OAS is for.
> 
> OAS is a government insurance policy to take care of those otherwise not able to take care of themselves. It has absolutely nothing to do with how hard you worked.
> 
> .


You are wrong on this point OAS was the original plan in place before CPP and continues today. GIS is the welfare plan for those that could not or would not save.


----------



## 1980z28 (Mar 4, 2010)

mrPPincer said:


> ok, so here's what you missed more or less.. (this was actually filmed in 1991 so, about a decade after the time when you or I would have been in there; I was in during the early 80's; eg. I was trained with the FNC1 or FNC2 rifle as opposed to the C7 rifle in the vids), also because the training became softer over time, it's not exactly what you would have experienced, but very close.
> 
> For example, in part 4, Morning Inspection, that nice female master corporal would not have been present in the barracks, it would have been some male master corporal screaming in your face, possibly spraying spittle & almost having a conniption lol.
> 
> ...


Wow we are the same in a lot of ways


----------



## Daniel A. (Mar 20, 2011)

AltaRed said:


> The problem is the Feds call OAS a pension, as in Old Age Security Pension when in fact it is an income supplement program. The way to really handle it is via means tested income like GIS and the HST/GST credit. Don't pay it out and then claw it back. Payouts should be graduated based on prior year's income tax returns. Indeed, take away OAS altogether and boost the GIS program instead. OAS was always intended to help keep seniors out of poverty. It is simply constructed bass ackwards.


Why not just base it on your personal asset value, seems that anyone worth more than a million dollars can let it go.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Daniel A. said:


> Why not just base it on your personal asset value, seems that anyone worth more than a million dollars can let it go.


It would force house rich, cash flow poor seniors out of their homes. That boat gets semi-floated from time to time but torpedoed before it gets momentum. Don't even start the debate about irrational seniors clinging desparately on to their homes and eating KD rather than selling out and using their assets. No idea what causes seniors to resist letting go of the boat anchor but the theme is common enough.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

tygrus said:


> If you think a person will be able to "make it" with a little pluck and perseverance in the next generation, you are mistaken.


I disagree wholeheartedly.


----------



## LBCfan (Jan 13, 2011)

To get back to the original thread, LBCfan and his better half have discovered that they have more $ than they need. Yes, they could force themselves to spend more just to burn it up or they could do what they do: spend whatever they want, whenever they want, on whatever they want. Every now and again the numbers suggest "treat the kids". The kids in question tennd to squirel such gains away. Apparently we taught them something.

We could, of course take the attitude of my FIL. He always said "if I can't take it with me, I'm not going". Worked to some extent, he outlasted most of his age group.


----------



## Daniel A. (Mar 20, 2011)

AltaRed said:


> It would force house rich, cash flow poor seniors out of their homes. That boat gets semi-floated from time to time but torpedoed before it gets momentum. Don't even start the debate about irrational seniors clinging desparately on to their homes and eating KD rather than selling out and using their assets. No idea what causes seniors to resist letting go of the boat anchor but the theme is common enough.


It's my view that most will likely need their OAS given the lack of either DB or DC pensions, at this time I think the numbers without pensions beyond CPP/ OAS is something in the range of 65%.
The average payout on CPP is something less than 600.00 per month what is sad is that many out there hear that CPP will pay over 1000.00 a month on retirement and never look any further to understand that is only what one could get if they meet all the criteria. 
I retired 6 years ago and live well with my pensions within my means.
I've met many others retired that started into retirement saying their house would be the key to a comfortable retirement ( read equity ) yet some years in they have not taken advantage of it but do complain about how hard it is to make ends meet. Its a choice I know some that are close to 70 and still working that really should not be, sitting on million dollar houses because one or the other spouse won't agree to sell. I've talked to more than one about how selling would improve their financial well being but nothing changes.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

Daniel A. said:


> It's my view that most will likely need their OAS given the lack of either DB or DC pensions, at this time I think the numbers without pensions beyond CPP/ OAS is something in the range of 65%.


I'd like to get more details from Stats Canada for the historical picture. The talk is able how RPPs are drastically dropping where I recall an article quoting Stats Canada that from 1980 to 2012, RPP coverage dropped 10%. I am not finding it though so all I've got handy is 1998 to 2013 which says RPP coverage for the labour force has basically stayed flat.http://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tableaux/sum-som/l01/cst01/labor26a-eng.htm

It is still a challenge with the number of companies capping or outright switching from a DB to DC pension.




Daniel A. said:


> ... The average payout on CPP is something less than 600.00 per month what is sad is that many out there hear that CPP will pay over 1000.00 a month on retirement and never look any further to understand that is only what one could get if they meet all the criteria.


Yes ... and guess what size font the note saying the CPP numbers included from the online tool projecting for individual employees income could be is?




Daniel A. said:


> ... I've met many others retired that started into retirement saying their house would be the key to a comfortable retirement ( read equity ) yet some years in they have not taken advantage of it but do complain about how hard it is to make ends meet. Its a choice I know some that are close to 70 and still working that really should not be, sitting on million dollar houses because one or the other spouse won't agree to sell ...


For some, the inertia of forty years is not something they are willing to take on. I think it is silly but that's me. :biggrin:

Cheers


----------

