Six In The Morning: Korea, Welfare, Williams, Melty

1 GET YOUR WAR ON North Korea talks scary talk, nobody likes it.

2 SASK WELFARE RIGHTS CENTRE CLOSING DOWN This looks bad even without the sociopathic comments after the story that fuel my mistrust.

3 FASTER WARMER MELTER The planet’s heating up quicker than believed, oh good. Hey how come climate skeptics never post in the comments on this blog? On second thought, I’m okay with that–the only guy I want to read a wall of text from is Malcolm+.

4 DANNY WILLIAMS RIDES INTO THE SUNSET The rascally rogue premier of Newfoundland calls it a career.

5 JOBLESS WORK Contract employment is on the rise in Canada, here’s the facts and nuances.


ALSO: There’s a big Wikileaks release coming this weekend and it sounds like it’ll be embarrassing for Canada. Some meanies abandoned a pet bunny but it looks like it was okay, phew. A federal policy change could (and probably will) whack low-income seniors. Almost 70 per cent of aboriginal kids in the province next door are poor. Stripper-on-break photos spark debate. A wind-powered hockey rink? I love it! Hey here’s a compelling story about mass transit expansion in Los Angeles.Yesterday Don Cherry backed a controversial Conservative candidate in Toronto. I love Cherry but he sometimes drives me nuts. I’m probably the only person who feels this way. Paul Krugman has a good column on Ireland’s bank-fueled economy disaster. By god, if an article has “Squid-Worm” in a headline, I’m going to link to it. Also, this is our 1200th post on this new blog. Zow.

Author: Stephen Whitworth

Prairie Dog editor Stephen Whitworth was carried to Regina in a swarm of bees. He's been with Prairie Dog since May 1999 and will die at his keyboard before admitting his career a terrible, terrible mistake.

9 thoughts on “Six In The Morning: Korea, Welfare, Williams, Melty”

  1. jeffg on the picket line

    jeffg: what do you want?
    others: prizes for posts!
    jeffg: when we do want it?
    others: er … look out, it’s the big boss, The King, he’s coming to … to … the do the Put-Down

    The King: get off this blog, you hosepail!!

    jeff slinks away with tail between legs, having been put-down. others resume posting

  2. Because I have an opinion on one of the above mentionings, I am going to share it…(hey, that’s what the interweb is for, right? Ranting lunatics on a verbal tirade?)…

    Re: “A federal policy change could (and probably will) whack low-income seniors” :

    RRSPs have always been counted as income for GIS calculation purposes, therefore why shouldn’t voluntary lump sum RRIF withdrawals be treated the same?

    GIS is a supplement associated with Old Age Security – as mentioned in the Globe article – and eligibility for that starts at 65. So, if anyone between the ages of 65-70 decides to withdraw a lump sum payment from their RRSP, this is counted as income for GIS purposes. However, for seniors over 70, RRSPs have to be turned into RRIFs. So why shouldn’t RRIFs be counted as income for GIS purposes? Why would the 65-70 gang be “penalized” for their withdrawal, just because it’s technically coming from a RRSP instead of a RRIF?

    Furthermore, if a RRIF is being paid out as a fixed payment(monthly, annually, whatever it may be), and those payments end because of the depletion of that RRIF, the option form (or “special provision allowed seniors to have GIS calculated based on their projected income” as the Globe article calls it) IS still available/applicable. I don’t believe THAT has changed.

    If a senior chooses to take out a lump sum payment from an RRSP or RRIF (regardless of their reason), this is considered income because it IS income they have received. And yes, it is calculated as part of their income for GIS purposes.

    The only solution I see is either:
    a) acknowledge this change has occurred to be consistent with how RRSP lump sum withdrawals are treated, as they are essentially the same thing with a different name depending on the age of the client, or

    b) allowing BOTH RRSPs and RRIFs that “special provision allowed seniors to have GIS calculated based on their projected income”.

    On a personal note, I do have family on the GIS. The income this family member has is only from a small CPP benefit, and the OAS/GIS benefit. This family member does not have the luxury of a RRSP or RRIF sitting in the bank “just in case”. In my opinion, these seniors who are blaming our “cruel” and “immoral” government should be thankful that the GIS does NOT take into account any assets they may have (RRSPs, RRIFs, large bank account balances, property owned, etc.). If you have the money available to take out a large lump sum and still not have that RRIF depleted (because, as mentioned above, if the RRIF is depleted that “special provision” IS available), then why shouldn’t that money be counted as income for GIS purposes? And, to conclude, I think it’s also important to recognize that the money gained from that lump sum withdrawal will be more than the money lost from the GIS monthly benefit.

    Okay, I’m done now.

  3. Is the Prarie Dog going to dig deeper into the Welfare Rights Center story? They where recently unionized and two of the active union supporters where fired, now the Wall government is taking away there funding.

Comments are closed.