Retirement age needs to be 70: think-tank
OTTAWA — Immigration to Canada would need to more than double from current levels, surpassing 600,000 a year, to offset the drag on living standards from an ageing population — a scenario that is “unrealistic,” a prominent think-tank warns in an analysis.
As a result, policymakers need to focus on potentially controversial initiatives that would delay the normal age of retirement, from 65 to 70, and persuade Canadian families to have more children, says the C.D. Howe Institute-issued paper, released Thurday.
Further, governments must revisit the country’s lacklustre productivity growth, which has taken a backseat as legislators have crafted policies aimed at mitigating the impact of the financial crisis.
William Robson, the think-tank’s president, said the changing demographics have to be dealt with because left unchecked, growth in the workforce and economic output will slow.
Furthermore, working-age households will have more of their income tapped by governments to cover the increased costs associated with paying out pension benefits and health-care for Baby Boomers.
[More]
Popularity: 19% [?]
Male, retired and the rest is of little interest to anyone. The site keeps me busy and if it helps others to stay abreast of daily events then my time is well spent.
Mitch Says:
The easiest solution would be to make the retirement age 100. That goes for all private and public sector union workers, MPs, MPPs etc…
Hope everyone likes their job because you’ll be there for a while longer.
Posted on July 3rd, 2009 at 11:24 am
UV Says:
If that happens, suggest employers look at installing wheel chair access in their buildings for most of their employees as well as more ‘handi-cap’ parking spots.
Posted on July 3rd, 2009 at 4:20 pm
Mac Says:
Perhaps what needs to happen is a remarkable change in expectations. Dump the nanny state-entitlement mentality attitude and start focusing on sustainability instead of running the economy like a nation-wide Ponzi scheme.
Posted on July 3rd, 2009 at 5:36 pm
mike Says:
They want more children, then make it financially rewarding instead of penalizing one income families. How about a family where 1 parent chooses to stay home and the other works can earn $50,000 before having to pay any federal taxes.
mid island mike
Posted on July 4th, 2009 at 12:01 am
Mac Says:
Excellent idea, mike. Either that or allow income splitting so the non-earning parent’s lack of salary isn’t financial suicide.
Posted on July 4th, 2009 at 12:04 am