The Ontario Retirement Pension Plan

Rising health care costs and population aging has fuelled the debate about the financial sustainability of Canada’s healthcare system. This demographic change in the Canadian society will deeply impact on all aspects of social, economic, and political factors. The extensive use of health care by the seniors has put a heavy burden on the universal health care system. This paper will closely analyze the sustainability of the Canadian healthcare system and the challenges our government has to face as our population ages and uses more of the healthcare expenditure. By examining the issue of health care sustainability, this paper will also propose recommendations and explore the implications of those recommendations.

One of the most important things in our lives today is Canada’s welfare state, as it transformed Canada’s economy after the economy’s downturn from the Great Depression. The democratic system was formed to maintain prosperity, solidity and security in our everyday lives. One of the key pillars of the nation’s welfare state is employment insurance (EI). Through this analysis of Canada’s employment insurance, I will elucidate why I believe that this program should continue, but with refinements, as it has benefited a large portion of unemployed Canadians over the years and should continue doing so to fulfill the countries goals of the welfare state.

By understanding the two opposing systems regarding health care, I believe that the Canadian health-care system should in fact be privatized. Despite the fact that the public health-care system is a great way of providing medical care to everyone, I believe that I am not receiving the best health-care that I could be receiving in other countries. Another reason why I favor privatized health care over publicized is because of what progressive taxation imposes among individuals who have a higher salary, they are taxed at a higher rate, due to the fact that they possess a larger amount taxable than those who do not make enough. I believe that hard working, successful individuals should be able to take advantage of their accomplishments, therefore

Therefore, it allowed Canadians to lead healthier lives since they were able to pay reasonable prices to have more medical checkups, tests and treatments from any doctor that was available to them. The new act did not only make a change for the health of Canadians, but also for poverty rates in the country. Before this act, many citizens were unable to go to work for long periods of time as a result of not receiving expensive treatments for severe and benign diseases that they had. This forced families to live in poverty as it became difficult for them to gain income. However, since Pearson’s program made it more affordable for individuals to get the medical care they needed, such instances became less common as more people became financially able to get treatment. This allowed these people to then become physically able to obtain a job and raise themselves out of poverty. Furthermore, another way that Pearson contributed to the lives of Canadians was by creating the Canadian Pension Plan

In Canada, there appears to be a publicly funded health care system whose main role is to help create healthier communities. However, how healthcare is being funded is very crucial to the Canadian system because they have been controversies over how health policy is dispersed between the levels of government. The Canadian health care system gives an advantage to those who have equitable access to necessary physician and hospital, without the ability for an individual to pay for services. This ideal is tremendously great because access and services are ensured to patients who have the same opportunity and medical conditions. This essay is going to explicate on how privatization will be detrimental to the health care system, and why publicly funded health care is the best criteria that should be associated with the Canadian system.

The Chicago Fire Department and The Chicago Police Department are in danger of losing their pensions. These brave men and women put their lives on the line every day and this is how the government repays them. This is not securing their future of retirement. Citizens believe that our first responder’s pensions should be a high priority to Chicago’s to-do list. This City of Chicago owes these brave men and women a pension like they promised and if that means cutting funds to other things, then it should be done. The pension secures the men and women’s future of retirement, and by taking it away from them it may create unstable lives.

The government has placed the responsibilities of housing, child care, education, retirement and much more on the individual. With all of the stress and responsibility placed on individuals, the Canadian government continues to make cuts to public expenditure on government aids. Depriving citizens of any safety nets and blaming them for being unable to acquire these underfunded social services.

In the article, “Parting at the Crossroads: The Development of Health Insurance in Canada and the United States” the author Antonia Maioni argues various points as to why Canada and the United States of America have such different approaches to targeting the healthcare system. The topics covered by Maioni included, “Health Reform in Canada: The Role of the CCF-NDP”. Here Maioni discuses in great detail, the historical background to how Canada got to where they are in the health system through the ups and downs that occurred in Parliament due to “the public demand for action on medical insurance” which was influenced by the highly successful medical insurance program that existed in Saskatchewan post-world war. It goes to show, that the passing

These concerns were reinforced by the fact that many elderly Canadians were applying for public relief.” However, it was not until several provinces began complaining about the amounting cost of relief that lead to the federal old age pension scheme. “Guest (as sited in Chappell, 2006) the federal government made a commitment to assist the elderly and the old age pensions act was established in 1927.” All Canadians were entitled once they reach the age of seventy or older in contrast to today, one can retire at the age of 60-65. The Canadian government eventually shared the cost of relief with the provincial government. The old age pension act has been criticized because of the inadequate in benefit pay outs. According to Guest (as sited in Chappell, 2006) in 1951, the old age pension was replaced by two pension plans, Old Age Security and Old Age Assistance.” The Old Age Security provides universal benefits and was funded by the federal government while the Old Age Assistance was funded by the federal and provincial government and managed by the province. As Guest (1997) pointed out, The Canadian Pension plan and Quebec Pension Plan was introduced in 1965 which individuals could collect once they retired, however they had to have made contribution between the ages of eighteen to seventy years of their working life.

A balance between public expectations, medical knowledge, technological change, economic and human resources, and political will. This site is designed to present a narrative history of the people, politics and programs that have contributed to making Medicare a distinctive thread in the web of social progress in Canada (Canada, 2012). The basic values of fairness and equity that are demonstrated by the willingness of Canadians to share resources and responsibility are displayed in Canada’s healthcare system. Also, the system has been and continues to be modified as the country’s population and circumstances change, and as the nature of health care itself evolves. Canada’s publicly funded health care system is dynamic-- reforms have been made over the past four decades and will continue in response to changes within medicine and throughout

Canada’s acceptance of the welfare state was brief however, and the economic downturn of the 1970’s, as well as right-wing campaigns calling for an end to social programs saw massive cuts to the social safety net so many Canadians depended on (p.46). It was believed that to combat economic stagnation and see a return to profits, many social programs must be eliminated. During the 1980’s and 1990’s government spending on social programs was drastically reduced, effectively dismantling much of the welfare state (another book).

The lack of flexibility within government, however, as Armstrong articulates that “opposition now comes not only from the big provinces but also from forces such as doctors’ organizations […] those seeking for profit” (Armstrong, p153). Governments’ are influenced from behind the scenes in the form of private investment and wealthy investors such as lobbyists. I do believe that if the government becomes more flexible, it would under these conditions - eliminate public funding across the board and implement a free market due to the persuasion of partisan funding. With the electoral system Canadians have in place, bipartisan voting and four or five-year electoral schedule, it differs political parties from imposing such changes, as they are confined to public opinions (Malcolmson, p227). In comparison, Armstrong defines our ‘rigidity’ as praise for resistance of private corporations and lobbyists, avoiding “pressuring individual legislators” (Armstrong, p21). The for-profit industry is heavily funded, therefore, can offer significantly more public persuasion. Furthermore, as discussed by our guest lecturer, we are geographically linked to the largest for-profit regime on the globe – our television is directly influenced by American advertisements, enticing our population to believing that we are restrained in choice of care by our government.

Mandatory retirement has a long history in the Canadian labour market system. Retirement is a social institution which emerged in the industrialized revolution during the beginning of the 20th century (McDonald 2). The social policy was developed along with the introduction of private and public pension plans (McDaniel and Um 75). Until recently, mandatory retirement was allowed in all of Canada jurisdictions except for Manitoba and Quebec (Gomez and Gunderson 2). Mandatory retirement was most prominent for males and persons with higher education, better health, full-time work, lived in urban locations and has higher income (Gomez and Gunderson 4). Maximum age limits are used by employers to institute mandatory retirement policies and the maximum age limits are used by employers to govern mandatory retirement policies. These limits have been challenged under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which applies to all

Modern governments promise old age security, which ensures that their citizens can fend for themselves during old age. The approaches, however, may vary from society to society. In some like The United Kingdom and Canada, government pensions are distributed to the elderly. In some others such as Singapore, the people are compelled to provide in advance for their old age dependency. Some societies have laws in place to enforce children to take care of elderly parents. For example, in Singapore, elderly parents may file in to the court if their children do not provide for them. However, there are various financial concerns about these methods. In the case of government pensions, the heavy spending of public fund on the old aged may take a toll on other areas of the nation’s development. Thus a method that works in a society may not work in another and sometimes, multiple approaches have to be taken.

Firstly, asymmetric information1 is a common form of problems in the financial markets as well as in the pension schemes because it may lead to moral hazard2. In Arnold’s (2012) opinion, asymmetric information may result in four problems: firstly, participants do not clear about whether their money is under too much risk or not (safety and soundness). Furthermore, they do not know if the people who manage the schemes will have hidden corrupt intensions (conflicts of interest). Moreover, the pension schemes may give the managers a chance to make large profits in a short time (fraud). Finally, participants are also uncertain if the people in charge will be competent in the job (incompetence). These four problems will result in participants’ losses (Arnold 2012).