Killer Carlson Posted October 16, 2007 Share Posted October 16, 2007 My freind has recently got a job in an elderly peoples home as a carer, out of curiosity i sked him to find out how elderly people who have no savings afford to live their (it costs in canadian terms about $1000 a week). Here is what he found out for me: If you have a house and/or any savings you pay for it yourself through selling your house or through your savings.(so that means your kids/grandkids dont inherit anything) If not- so basically if you havent worked a day in your life and been a bum pretty much all your life guess what- its free the government pay for it. personally i think its an utter disgrace and completly unjust. opinions please Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Puck Posted October 16, 2007 Share Posted October 16, 2007 My freind has recently got a job in an elderly peoples home as a carer, out of curiosity i sked him to find out how elderly people who have no savings afford to live their (it costs in canadian terms about $1000 a week). Here is what he found out for me: If you have a house and/or any savings you pay for it yourself through selling your house or through your savings.(so that means your kids/grandkids dont inherit anything) If not- so basically if you havent worked a day in your life and been a bum pretty much all your life guess what- its free the government pay for it. personally i think its an utter disgrace and completly unjust. opinions please Yes that does sound unfair. I have a question for you KC. Do you think the government should give free care to everyone or should they force the elderly who don't have any assets out of the home? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre the Great Posted October 16, 2007 Share Posted October 16, 2007 so you're saying that grandma is a bum because she grew up in a backwards society where women where only meant to give birth to kids and be "lady" like? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mils Posted October 16, 2007 Share Posted October 16, 2007 Perhaps it isn't a question of whether those who have no assets should be allowed to stay or cast out to the streets, but a question of whether the government should treat each person the same whether they have assets or not. Should the method of payment be determined by "do you have the money?" or, rather, would it be more fair to treat those with assets and those without in the same manner? (The great conundrum of taxation ultimately. The answers to these questions probably align with one's larger political views.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre the Great Posted October 16, 2007 Share Posted October 16, 2007 everyone is the same, no matter if you are a billionaire or a homeless person. If you don't want it, you should be able to decline it, but you'd still pay to help out another person. We are in this together whether you don't like it or not. The ship must stay strong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killer Carlson Posted October 24, 2007 Author Share Posted October 24, 2007 everyone is the same, no matter if you are a billionaire or a homeless person. If you don't want it, you should be able to decline it, but you'd still pay to help out another person. We are in this together whether you don't like it or not. The ship must stay strong. thats fine in principal pierre i agree with it- thatd be great- i just dont agree with the robin hood ways of stealing from the rich to give to the poor, i think people have to take some responisbility for themselves. for instance i believe unless i win the lottery or i am in a major accident where i become disabled and cant work that i will work for the rest of my life- pay taxes and if i lose a job i will try my hardest to go out and find one because i feel shameful claiming benefits off other people who work hard (fortunatley i havent had to do so yet altho i have been unemployed for a month - i was clever enough to put some away for a rainy day- and that was on part time wages). so if i can do it- and im not the most easy person to motivate to work then why cant everyone- i knwo theirs only so many jobs- but in britain now you can earn as much in benefits as you can working (basically you can claim dole if your working only upto 16 hours a week) so a lot of people try and get part time work and then scrounge a decent income off the rest of us. i jsut dont think its fair one bit. maybe by me saying evryone should be responsible for themselves then nobody should inherit and im being a hypocrit? i dont know. im not saying it makes a person a worse human being for not working- but if everyone had that attitude then what would society be like? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre the Great Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 so basically what you are saying is when something happens to me, and I run out of money, I'm just going to die. That's what it sounds like to me. You work part time? How do you think your wage was high enough to be able to live on a part time basis? just saying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markierung Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 so you're saying that grandma is a bum because she grew up in a backwards society where women where only meant to give birth to kids and be "lady" like? Women has been working in Canada since WWII. My grandmother came off the boat from Italy and worked as a seamstress. Don't tell me that Canada is a backwards society. People who wanted jobs and were concerned for their future prepared for it ahead of time through pension funds, investments and stuffing cash under the matress. same goes for England, if anything, women were working over there years before they were working over here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre the Great Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 Women has been working in Canada since WWII. My grandmother came off the boat from Italy and worked as a seamstress. Don't tell me that Canada is a backwards society. People who wanted jobs and were concerned for their future prepared for it ahead of time through pension funds, investments and stuffing cash under the matress. same goes for England, if anything, women were working over there years before they were working over here was using the example of my own grandmothers. one cleaned houses at minimum wage. The other was taught that women have their place on the farm, and never had a job, had to quit school after grade 6. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33 Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 so you're saying that grandma is a bum because she grew up in a backwards society where women where only meant to give birth to kids and be "lady" like? What about grandpa's money? Assuming the grandma was married, of course. Either grandpa would have some money to pay for it or if he's passed away, your grandma would have that money, unless the grandpa was a real jerk. Btw, a question to Pierre about universal health care - what happens to all the people who make a living selling health/life insurance? Only claims people would still need to be employed to take care of insurance, so what happens with such an influx of unemployed persons? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre the Great Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 my bet, the people that sell insurance work for the health care provider now. Plus any notion that Canada is completely universal is a farce. In BC its two tier. doctors hospitals emergency care specialists are the universal care Since Campbell took over he's moved dental and vision out of MSP and wants to eventually move specialists out. Stupid. So before the Socreds oops I mean Liberals took over bc looked like this doctors hospitals emergency care specialists vision dental NDP fights for drugs to be moved up into the universal plank. What's not covered by the MSP is dental drugs paramedical then elite services vision cosmetic orthodontist Since I'm in a union, we fought for the right to get covered like any business health insurance plan has for working people. So now I'm covered across the board. Conservatives have been eating away at the services, people are oblivious to this because they don't vote, saying its not worth their time. Health insurance people probably are lobbyists now lobbying the governments to open up illegal private clinics. ----- On Grandma, Grandpa was the farmer, whatever grandma owns is a farm now, but now that's in complete control of my uncle. So she's more or less a property of my family farm now. long story. Medicare Other grandma, living off of nothing. The Nazi's and Stalin couldn't kill her, so conservative policies to screw her over isn't going to bother her. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33 Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 my bet, the people that sell insurance work for the health care provider now. Health care providers are already staffed, what's an insurance salesman gonna do for them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Stealth Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Completely irrelevent to this thread but with the way the Canucks play hockey they should be in an elderly peoples home. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killer Carlson Posted October 25, 2007 Author Share Posted October 25, 2007 so basically what you are saying is when something happens to me, and I run out of money, I'm just going to die. That's what it sounds like to me. You work part time? How do you think your wage was high enough to be able to live on a part time basis? just saying. i dont work part time i used to just after finishing college, until i found a job i liked- but then i got laid off but didnt go on the dole because id saved some money from my part time job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mils Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Completely irrelevent to this thread but with the way the Canucks play hockey they should be in an elderly peoples home. Stealthy: For once we agree entirely on something regarding the schmucks... I mean the Canucks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Stealth Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 Stealthy: For once we agree entirely on something regarding the schmucks... I mean the Canucks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.