New 2016 Canada Child Benefit cheques

Recommended reading, economic debates, predictions and opinions.
OnlyMyOpinion
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 4231
Joined: 24 Jan 2014 23:17

Re: New 2016 Canada Child Benefit cheques

Post by OnlyMyOpinion »

MarketLost wrote:You could also complain about how seniors use most of the health care funding, and they also receive OAS. Do you suggest we have suicide centers a la Soylent Green so they don't burden those of us that haven't needed either?
Sorry I'm off-thread. Actually with bill C-14 plus the massive, looming shortage of care and facilities for elderly in need, I think we will see a future something like you suggest. Not suicide at the behest of the government, but driven by elderly fed up with their quality of life and lack of care. Already the waiting time and ability to care for those classified as 'in crisis' has become unacceptable imo. It is going to get much worse.
Just a Guy
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 592
Joined: 01 Dec 2014 19:28

Re: New 2016 Canada Child Benefit cheques

Post by Just a Guy »

Not sure what you'd classify as "turn up their nose". People, including family, certainly weren't sympathetic.

In fact, my mother in law once said to me, "shouldn't I be getting a job and supporting my family?" Of course, she still probably thinks I'm a deadbeat today because I don't have a regular job...

We had a conversation once a few years ago about net worth by accident, she's pretty convinced I've got no idea what that means since my numbers couldn't be right in her eyes.

My family isn't much better. When you live a lifestyle completely different from the norm, people don't like it. Same as my comments about racism in the other thread.

I'm still borderline depressed, a companion to chronic pain, and I can tell you no one who hasn't suffered depression has any idea or sympathy about the condition.
User avatar
Spidey
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 4556
Joined: 11 Jan 2009 19:55
Location: Ottawa

Re: New 2016 Canada Child Benefit cheques

Post by Spidey »

MarketLost wrote:
Spidey wrote:It appears that the average payout for a child in a family of average income is about $230.00 a month which invested over 17 years should be well in excess of the amount required to pay university tuition. Although it goes against my usual belief of letting individuals decide how to spend their money (assuming that not taking this amount from our taxes to begin with is off the table), I wonder if we would receive better bang for our buck by offering free post-secondary education.
Have you seen the cost of tuition these days, and how fast it's been rising? You won't even come close to covering the cost of a four year degree. I was just looking into taking some courses at uOttawa and it's ~$9K for one year of engineering! That's just the tuition and ancillary fees, then you need textbooks, and if you're going away for university, you're talking almost $25K once you include your living fees. That's between $36-$100K for a four-year degree in current dollars, so I'm not sure what investment you can get to cover the costs.
Yes, I have looked at the cost of tuition - I've put 2 children through post-secondary education and I'm currently putting my 3rd child into a bio-med program at Ottawa U. I did say just tuition. $230 a month over 17 years amounts to $46920.00 and that's considering a zero return. Even at 9K that cover over 5 years of tuition. The more typical tuition is 7k and that would cover over 7 years. And of course, if you even get a couple of percent return greater than inflation that would cover even more years - but the average university is probably still a 4 year bachelor degree.

My bigger point is that I think it would be generally agreed (but no consensus I know) that the best use of this money would be to save it toward post-secondary education. Perhaps we should direct the money this way to begin with.
If life seems jolly rotten, then there's something you've forgotten -- and that's to laugh and smile and dance and sing. - Eric Idle
Flaccidsteele
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 4523
Joined: 06 Mar 2014 12:52
Location: Retired Gen Xer somewhere on the planet earth

Re: New 2016 Canada Child Benefit cheques

Post by Flaccidsteele »

Spidey wrote:My bigger point is that I think it would be generally agreed (but no consensus I know) that the best use of this money would be to save it toward post-secondary education. Perhaps we should direct the money this way to begin with.
"Best use" is relative. Most low income families have far more pressing needs long before then.
Flaccidsteele
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 4523
Joined: 06 Mar 2014 12:52
Location: Retired Gen Xer somewhere on the planet earth

Re: New 2016 Canada Child Benefit cheques

Post by Flaccidsteele »

MarketLost wrote:You could also complain about how seniors use most of the health care funding, and they also receive OAS.
I agree.

It's naive to just want to pay taxes for services that one uses. I completely understand that I pay taxes to support many things that I don't use, but benefit Canadian society in general. I have no problems with this.

Aside from tailoring the new Canadian Child Benefit to a household's relative cost of living, I think it's pretty good.
gobsmack
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 447
Joined: 04 Sep 2015 13:16

Re: New 2016 Canada Child Benefit cheques

Post by gobsmack »

Spidey wrote:My bigger point is that I think it would be generally agreed (but no consensus I know) that the best use of this money would be to save it toward post-secondary education. Perhaps we should direct the money this way to begin with.
I think paying for daycare might be a more pressing concern for many families. It costs more then university tuition and there is no RESP program to save for it.

When I was working in AB, I saw a large number of women who were not working because they simply could not afford it. I think all my friends who had two kids were the only breadwinners in their households. Their wives were staying at home. Daycare costs so much that, if they were to go to work, they would be paying for the privilege of doing so. Even with only one kid, the cost of daycare alone can rival your mortgage/rent payment. No wonder these women were choosing to stay at home even though many of them had university degrees and middle-class jobs before their children were born. These women will only get a chance to return to the workforce many years later. Their careers will most likely never recover.

Let's imagine a couple who decides to soldier on through this. The wife continues to work even though daycare costs nullify the extra income she's bringing home. What if one of the parents is fired? Once EI payments start to trickle in, the first order of the day will be to cut costs. Daycare will obviously be very high on that list. It takes 9 to 12 months to get a new spot in a daycare though. If they cut daycare and lose their spot, it will be very hard for him/her to return to the workforce.

I also worked in ON for a while and it looked like daycare was just as expensive. Therefore, I imagine this is not only an issue in AB.
User avatar
Spidey
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 4556
Joined: 11 Jan 2009 19:55
Location: Ottawa

Re: New 2016 Canada Child Benefit cheques

Post by Spidey »

Flaccidsteele wrote:
Spidey wrote:My bigger point is that I think it would be generally agreed (but no consensus I know) that the best use of this money would be to save it toward post-secondary education. Perhaps we should direct the money this way to begin with.
"Best use" is relative. Most low income families have far more pressing needs long before then.
That appears to assume that most low income families make wise use of the money. Speaking from experience, this is not usually the case. Many, and probably most low income children would gain far greater benefit from tuition.
If life seems jolly rotten, then there's something you've forgotten -- and that's to laugh and smile and dance and sing. - Eric Idle
kombat
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 929
Joined: 26 Feb 2007 09:23
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: New 2016 Canada Child Benefit cheques

Post by kombat »

MarketLost wrote:Do you have children? Either you don't, or you are making enough money that you don't notice the expenses such as day care, which can easily reach $9K in Ontario.
Is this what it's come to? Have we finally reached a point in society where it's simply presumed that if you have kids, you're going to stick them in daycare and pay a stranger to raise them? How did we drift so far way from the concept of one parent staying home to raise their own kids, that it's now a given that both parents will deem to continue working, and the rest of us must chip in and help them pay for their choices (both to have kids in the first place, and both keep working)?

Kids are a choice. If you can't afford them, don't have them. It's 2016. There are options.
gobsmack
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 447
Joined: 04 Sep 2015 13:16

Re: New 2016 Canada Child Benefit cheques

Post by gobsmack »

kombat wrote:Kids are a choice. If you can't afford them, don't have them. It's 2016. There are options.
You are in luck! This is exactly what is happening in Canada. This trend may impact your portfolio though. At least in Canada, we seem to be more open to the idea of importing young people as immigrants so perhaps we have an alternative/partial solution at hand.
User avatar
Descartes
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 1856
Joined: 03 Nov 2008 09:59

Re: New 2016 Canada Child Benefit cheques

Post by Descartes »

kombat wrote:Kids are a choice. If you can't afford them, don't have them.
What an absurd idea in this day and age.
"A dividend is a dictate of management. A capital gain is a whim of the market."
Just a Guy
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 592
Joined: 01 Dec 2014 19:28

Re: New 2016 Canada Child Benefit cheques

Post by Just a Guy »

Why is it that we keep talking about only two ways for people to get money? Either they get a job, or a government handout.

This is a financial forum, yet you're all stuck in this mode of thinking.

When I had kids, there was at least one parent home, sometimes two. The reason? Passive income.

Personally, I'm of the feeling that, if you have kids, it's your responsibility to raise them. They aren't some sort of status symbol or, in this day of video games, some achievement level. The idea of having them, pawning them off on someone else all day and then putting them to bed has nothing to do with being a parent. My kids can all cook, clean, do laundry, they can repair cars, drive equipment, take care of animals, run their own businesses (vending machines, I don't give them an allowance, I give them the opportunity to earn money without working directly...passive income), play sports, have an idea about investing, know construction, electricity, plumbing, etc. They know how to work and solve problems and aren't even in university yet. None of this is taught in any daycare that I've seen.

The reason my wife and I were able to raise and teach them? I didn't have a job or government handouts...I did things differently. It wasn't easy, we don't own the latest video game systems, never have, nor a bunch of other "stuff" that seems equally mandatory these days. We don't travel the world every summer, or have expensive cars...you can't put 6 people in a porche, Mercedes, or bmw. My kids don't wear designer clothes, nor do they want to. I took what I had between my ears and used it to find solutions, btw I had kids at the time of my accident, they were very young, so I didn't wait until I had money to have them either.

I expected more creativity about "the kid problem" from a financial board. This thinking of either work or get money from the government because that's the only way is probably the true reason people are going nowhere.
Flaccidsteele
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 4523
Joined: 06 Mar 2014 12:52
Location: Retired Gen Xer somewhere on the planet earth

Re: New 2016 Canada Child Benefit cheques

Post by Flaccidsteele »

Spidey wrote:That appears to assume that most low income families make wise use of the money. Speaking from experience, this is not usually the case. Many, and probably most low income children would gain far greater benefit from tuition.
This depends on what fraction of the 60% of high school students who get a post-secondary education, are low income. If low income children aren't getting to that point, then the post-secondary tuition benefit won't really be a benefit at all.

And we're also talking about the high school students who don't get a post-secondary education. Do they just miss out? Or is the expectation that free post-secondary education will result in 100% of high school students to get a post-secondary education?

There's also the issue of the questionable value of the post-secondary education...unless the government wants to look at our economy and "gently encourage" some areas of study over others?
Just a Guy wrote:Why is it that we keep talking about only two ways for people to get money? Either they get a job, or a government handout.

This is a financial forum, yet you're all stuck in this mode of thinking.

When I had kids, there was at least one parent home, sometimes two. The reason? Passive income.
I agree, but...wrong crowd JaG....wrong crowd...
Last edited by Flaccidsteele on 13 Aug 2016 00:49, edited 1 time in total.
MarketLost
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 62
Joined: 16 Jul 2016 12:30

Re: New 2016 Canada Child Benefit cheques

Post by MarketLost »

Just a Guy wrote:Not sure what you'd classify as "turn up their nose". People, including family, certainly weren't sympathetic.

In fact, my mother in law once said to me, "shouldn't I be getting a job and supporting my family?" Of course, she still probably thinks I'm a deadbeat today because I don't have a regular job...

We had a conversation once a few years ago about net worth by accident, she's pretty convinced I've got no idea what that means since my numbers couldn't be right in her eyes.

My family isn't much better. When you live a lifestyle completely different from the norm, people don't like it. Same as my comments about racism in the other thread.

I'm still borderline depressed, a companion to chronic pain, and I can tell you no one who hasn't suffered depression has any idea or sympathy about the condition.
That would definitely count as turning their noses up to you. Usually, they treat you as if your a leper or something, and that everything is an issue with your character.

Have you sought attention for the depression and chronic pain? Depression can actually bring on chronic pain. I was off work for almost 3 months this year and had to go to a chronic pain specialist. It was interesting that they wouldn't diagnose me before 12 weeks, but the specialist said that anything past 2 weeks is when they consider it an issue. He also mentioned that it can either be caused by depression, or cause it. The whole thing about chronic pain is it has a nasty positive reinforcement system that means once it starts, it is harder to stop, and can get a lot worse before it gets better.
MarketLost
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 62
Joined: 16 Jul 2016 12:30

Re: New 2016 Canada Child Benefit cheques

Post by MarketLost »

Spidey wrote:
Yes, I have looked at the cost of tuition - I've put 2 children through post-secondary education and I'm currently putting my 3rd child into a bio-med program at Ottawa U. I did say just tuition. $230 a month over 17 years amounts to $46920.00 and that's considering a zero return. Even at 9K that cover over 5 years of tuition. The more typical tuition is 7k and that would cover over 7 years. And of course, if you even get a couple of percent return greater than inflation that would cover even more years - but the average university is probably still a 4 year bachelor degree.

My bigger point is that I think it would be generally agreed (but no consensus I know) that the best use of this money would be to save it toward post-secondary education. Perhaps we should direct the money this way to begin with.
And you actually have money to afford an Internet connection? :shock:

I was think you were talking about the whole amount, but yes, just tuition should be fine, unless the Ontario Government decides to let universities raise rates like Harris did. I agree that is where it should be. I'm almost 50, but have a young son, so I'm putting everything I can towards his RESP. I'm fortunately that at least I don't need the extra money, so this is just a bonus for me.
MarketLost
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 62
Joined: 16 Jul 2016 12:30

Re: New 2016 Canada Child Benefit cheques

Post by MarketLost »

kombat wrote:
MarketLost wrote:Do you have children? Either you don't, or you are making enough money that you don't notice the expenses such as day care, which can easily reach $9K in Ontario.
Is this what it's come to? Have we finally reached a point in society where it's simply presumed that if you have kids, you're going to stick them in daycare and pay a stranger to raise them? How did we drift so far way from the concept of one parent staying home to raise their own kids, that it's now a given that both parents will deem to continue working, and the rest of us must chip in and help them pay for their choices (both to have kids in the first place, and both keep working)?

Kids are a choice. If you can't afford them, don't have them. It's 2016. There are options.

I think you're in the wrong forum. Perhaps you are looking for something where they talk about how great the good ol' days are, and how society is going to hell in a hand basket. :roll:

I also notice that you don't mention whether you have children, so I'm assume the answer is no you don't. Since you have no clue what your talking about, how about you don't tell the rest of us who have children how to raise them, deal?
User avatar
ghariton
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 15954
Joined: 18 Feb 2005 18:59
Location: Ottawa

Re: New 2016 Canada Child Benefit cheques

Post by ghariton »

Please keep the conversation civil. There's no need to make personal comments or denigrate others.

This is especially true in the financial sections.

George
The juice is worth the squeeze
Just a Guy
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 592
Joined: 01 Dec 2014 19:28

Re: New 2016 Canada Child Benefit cheques

Post by Just a Guy »

MarketLost wrote:That would definitely count as turning their noses up to you. Usually, they treat you as if your a leper or something, and that everything is an issue with your character.

Have you sought attention for the depression and chronic pain? Depression can actually bring on chronic pain. I was off work for almost 3 months this year and had to go to a chronic pain specialist. It was interesting that they wouldn't diagnose me before 12 weeks, but the specialist said that anything past 2 weeks is when they consider it an issue. He also mentioned that it can either be caused by depression, or cause it. The whole thing about chronic pain is it has a nasty positive reinforcement system that means once it starts, it is harder to stop, and can get a lot worse before it gets better.
I suppose it could be seen as that, I don't see it that way personally. I know that my lifestyle is different than their's, that they don't understand it. I feel more pity for them though, they always seem to complain about their lives, but are unwilling to change. I had a job once, didn't like it, so I found a way to do what I want and still support myself. I got very good at it, and somewhat lucky probably, so I get to live my life by my rules. If I don't like what I'm doing, I change it.

As for the depression, it came on because of the situation I was in and I realized that. They offered meds at the time, but I didn't see how that would help with my situation. So I waited it out, when my situation changed, I was no longer depressed. I do know several people who went the medical route (you meet a lot of injured people when you're in treatment) and, while they found themselves frustrated at the side effects, the antidepressants made them not care that they were frustrated...

My mind is the main reason I was able to turn things around, had I had antidepressants clouding my thinking, or "dulling" the pain of the situation (see my earlier remarks about the poor having it too comfortable), I probably wouldn't have been as driven to change my situation.

I have a very high pain tolerance, in fact I don't really feel the pain anymore until I stop moving and allow it to "hit" me. I more notice when my body stops functioning properly. I'm still in treatment for the pain, probably always will be. I have good days and bad days, usually the bad days are brought on by weather changes. It can get frustrating and thus I can slip back into depression, however I'm aware of what's happening and thus I don't wind up "giving in" to it and can usually force myself out of it. I don't suffer from severe depression, I'm lucky that way.

Before my injuries, I was doing okay financially, but it's nothing compared to where I am today. I wouldn't be where I am now without them. I probably would be working longer hours for my first company like I was back then. While I don't like being in pain all the time, and I'd love to have my body operate like it used to, I get to do far more today and spend tons of time with my family...things I would have missed out on had they not happened.
kombat
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 929
Joined: 26 Feb 2007 09:23
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: New 2016 Canada Child Benefit cheques

Post by kombat »

MarketLost wrote:I also notice that you don't mention whether you have children, so I'm assume the answer is no you don't. Since you have no clue what your talking about, how about you don't tell the rest of us who have children how to raise them, deal?
As soon as parents stop holding their hands out for MY money to raise THEIR kids, deal. If they want my money, I feel entitled to share an opinion along with it.
Flaccidsteele
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 4523
Joined: 06 Mar 2014 12:52
Location: Retired Gen Xer somewhere on the planet earth

Re: New 2016 Canada Child Benefit cheques

Post by Flaccidsteele »

kombat wrote:As soon as parents stop holding their hands out for MY money to raise THEIR kids, deal. If they want my money, I feel entitled to share an opinion along with it.
Out of curiosity, if you had children would you move to forfeit your Canadian Child Benefits?

Also out of curiosity, do you consider government policies acceptable only if they benefit you directly?
User avatar
AltaRed
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 33398
Joined: 05 Mar 2005 20:04
Location: Ogopogo Land

Re: New 2016 Canada Child Benefit cheques

Post by AltaRed »

I think Kombat is off the richter scale on this subject. Canada (and Canadians) have always been more socially compassionate (and I would argue socially responsible) than its hard ass neighbour to the south for example.

I raised kids and thus benefitted financially somewhere from Canadian society (education component of property tax bills, grants to secondary educational institutions, tuition tax credits, etc.). They are now contributing to Canada's GDP. I am more than prepared to continue to do so for reasons many have already articulated. It is all a matter of degree.
Imagefiniki, the Canadian financial wiki The go-to place to bolster your financial freedom
User avatar
CROCKD
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 3343
Joined: 15 Aug 2008 16:59
Location: GTA

Re: New 2016 Canada Child Benefit cheques

Post by CROCKD »

AltaRed wrote:Canada (and Canadians) have always been more socially compassionate (and I would argue socially responsible) than its hard ass neighbour to the south for example.
+1 :thumbsup:
" A verbal contract isn't worth the paper it is written on " Samuel Goldwyn
"The light at the end of the tunnel may be a freight train coming your way" Metallica - No Leaf Clover
MarketLost
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 62
Joined: 16 Jul 2016 12:30

Re: New 2016 Canada Child Benefit cheques

Post by MarketLost »

kombat wrote:
MarketLost wrote:I also notice that you don't mention whether you have children, so I'm assume the answer is no you don't. Since you have no clue what your talking about, how about you don't tell the rest of us who have children how to raise them, deal?
As soon as parents stop holding their hands out for MY money to raise THEIR kids, deal. If they want my money, I feel entitled to share an opinion along with it.
So are you willing to pay back the money YOUR parent's were subsidized? Feel free to pay back all your medical expenses, your education costs, baby bonus, and maternity leave. I don't think anyone was asked if your parents could have kids, either.
MarketLost
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 62
Joined: 16 Jul 2016 12:30

Re: New 2016 Canada Child Benefit cheques

Post by MarketLost »

AltaRed wrote:I think Kombat is off the richter scale on this subject. Canada (and Canadians) have always been more socially compassionate (and I would argue socially responsible) than its hard ass neighbour to the south for example.

I raised kids and thus benefitted financially somewhere from Canadian society (education component of property tax bills, grants to secondary educational institutions, tuition tax credits, etc.). They are now contributing to Canada's GDP. I am more than prepared to continue to do so for reasons many have already articulated. It is all a matter of degree.
Exactly.
Flaccidsteele
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 4523
Joined: 06 Mar 2014 12:52
Location: Retired Gen Xer somewhere on the planet earth

Re: New 2016 Canada Child Benefit cheques

Post by Flaccidsteele »

AltaRed wrote:I think Kombat is off the richter scale on this subject. Canada (and Canadians) have always been more socially compassionate (and I would argue socially responsible) than its hard ass neighbour to the south for example.

I raised kids and thus benefitted financially somewhere from Canadian society (education component of property tax bills, grants to secondary educational institutions, tuition tax credits, etc.). They are now contributing to Canada's GDP. I am more than prepared to continue to do so for reasons many have already articulated. It is all a matter of degree.
:thumbsup:
MarketLost wrote:So are you willing to pay back the money YOUR parent's were subsidized?
That's a good question.
kombat
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 929
Joined: 26 Feb 2007 09:23
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: New 2016 Canada Child Benefit cheques

Post by kombat »

Flaccidsteele wrote:Out of curiosity, if you had children would you move to forfeit your Canadian Child Benefits?
Of course not. I would claim every penny my kids were entitled to, and use it to better their lives. But that doesn't mean I can't object to the program in general.
Flaccidsteele wrote:Also out of curiosity, do you consider government policies acceptable only if they benefit you directly?
Again, of course not. I fully recognize that there are a great number of programs that improve the overall general welfare of the population, but have no impact on my individual experience whatsoever. However, I view the merits of such programs through a lens that accounts for "need." Take OAS, for example. I think it's outrageous that a retired couple can be earning $230,000/year (not even counting whatever they're withdrawing from their TFSA!), and still claim at least a portion of OAS. OAS is a welfare program. I sincerely believe that if younger Canadian taxpayers truly knew how many millionaires were claiming this welfare benefit, there'd be riots in the streets.

That said, if my wife and I qualify for the benefit when the time comes in another two and a half decades, I will of course claim it.
AltaRed wrote:Canada (and Canadians) have always been more socially compassionate (and I would argue socially responsible) than its hard ass neighbour to the south for example.
I consider myself compassionate, but I also consider myself fair and pragmatic. I simply don't think it's fair that the government takes money from me, and redistributes it to people who've chosen to have children, when those people already have more than enough money to raise said children. They don't need my money, yet the government forces me to hand it over anyway, because it's a popular vote-getter.
AltaRed wrote:I raised kids and thus benefitted financially somewhere from Canadian society (education component of property tax bills, grants to secondary educational institutions, tuition tax credits, etc.). They are now contributing to Canada's GDP. I am more than prepared to continue to do so for reasons many have already articulated. It is all a matter of degree.
Fair enough. But are the parents responsible for that burden, or is the child supposed to feel obligated to "repay" the benefits they've enjoyed from society (education, safe community to grow up in, etc.)? Because I'm getting the sense that people in this debate wish to paint it both ways, depending on when it suits their argument. For example:
MarketLost wrote:So are you willing to pay back the money YOUR parent's were subsidized?
So am I financially responsible for the money my parents received for me (i.e., the burden is on the child to "repay"), or am I responsible for contributing to raise children I didn't have (i.e., the burden is on the society, "it takes a village")? You can't have it both ways.
Post Reply