Here is a comment I left under a recent CBC news article about the Canadian government's intention to revise (read: cut) retirement benefits as the Baby Boom generation begins to retire:
The idea that the Baby Boomers are a "have-not" generation is a fiction. It makes no sense for the richest generation in human history to receive entitlement money funded by taxing a generation of younger people who empirically have less money and can expect a dimmer economic future than the recipients of such benefits.
This isn't about left vs. right, this is a fundamental historical shift in human perspectives. Handing out transfer payments to the comparative rich is unheard of even in the most socialist nations in history. It would be a serious policy mistake *not* to cut old age pensions and social insurance benefits to the Baby Boomers.
Boomers can thumbs-down this comment to their hearts' content - it will never alter the mathematics of the issue. As a generation, they are better-off than their children. Demanding pensions funded by their children's comparatively lower earnings is unconscionable.What do you think?
Post a Comment