Close Menu
    Politik

    Warum Konservative eine Erhöhung der Altersrenten unterstützen


    Warum Konservative eine Erhöhung der Altersrenten unterstützen

    https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/why-conservatives-are-supporting-an-increase-for-old-age-pensions-and-why-its-risky

    View 7 Comments

    7 Comments

    1. WhaddaHutz on

      > Some Conservative MPs offered few details when asked to explain **how adding $16 billion in new handouts would help them “fix” the budget and not fuel inflation.**

      > “That’s a good question,” said Conservative MP Brad Vis on his way to question period on Thursday. His colleague, Michael Barrett, said **the way to solve it is to have a “carbon tax election.”**

      Just goes to show how intellectually bankrupt this party is. They have devolved into nothing but a series of 3 word slogans and buzzwords.

      I’m sure once they win they’ll probably get some semblance of policy gears installed, but it’s certainly going to feel like dog chasing cars for a while… having few ideas of what they’ll do once they catch it.

    2. benjadmo on

      > Former Alberta MLA Derek Fildebrandt said it was a “total betrayal” of key Conservative principles the party has championed.

      Isn’t it funny how Conservatives actually doing a good thing is viewed as a total betrayal of Conservative principles by Conservatives

      Just fully admitting to being the baddies. Way to spoil the plot, dude.

    3. Jaded_Promotion8806 on

      Because the Liberals don’t support it and old people vote. Double whammy. Same as it ever was.

    4. Sir__Will on

      > Why Conservatives are supporting an increase for old age pensions

      Because they know it won’t pass and they think it’ll make the Liberals look bad. This is the party that wanted to raise the eligibility age. The party that will get rid of benefits like dental for seniors. They certainly don’t want to spend more on the service.

    5. Le1bn1z on

      >OAS annual expenditures are expected to grow to almost $100 billion by 2028–29 and to about $234 billion by 2055–56, the federal budget projects.

      Holy heck. That’s well over 20% of all federal taxes going into a mass wealth transfer to the wealthiest generation in our history. That is an absolutely wild fiscal and economic distortion in favour of the privileged that can only lead very bad places.

      The morality, to say nothing of optics, of having working families crammed into apartments, living in provinces all of which have lower incomes that any American state, paying a significant portion of their paycheque into subsidies to millionaires to kick around large family homes frankly approaches bad parody.

      I’m all for a strong and proactive welfare state, but someone sitting on $1.5 million in assets and drawing $70,000 in income does not need another $900 a month in government subsidies.

      Politically, the OAS is a long term hazard to any government, as its manifest unfairness and burden on the young and poor is something that is both enormous and, more importantly, really simple to understand.

    6. OneLessFool on

      Honestly shocked the NDP voted for this.

      Top up programs for struggling seniors would be great, or investing federal money and resources into programs, or into convincing provinces to invest in those programs, that help struggling seniors would also be great. An across the board increase just doesn’t seem reasonable.

    7. mcgojoh1 on

      why did they support it? Is it because they are going to jack the age requirements back up to 67 when they get a majority by Oct 2025?

    Leave A Reply