No doubt about it, our ‘free’ medical system is very expensive and that trend isn’t reversing any time soon.

MSP is kind of a contract with the government. Right? If you don’t pay on time you could lose yer coverage. Whence supplying their end of said contract….well you can just wait and wait and wait. Sounds fair to me. (sarcasm off)

I am told that BC is the only province that makes seniors pay medical premiums. Shame.

Oldun… Let’s get our pitchforks and torches. Meet somewhere and show this government where to get off. We can each bring a few backers too.

The last people who should see any increase into map is seniors..they have paid for 30-40 years into the system. Liberals..family first my butt.. Unless they meant who she would gouge first.

Seniors are the biggest users of the system and there is no reason that they should be exempt from premiums. If they are on a low fixed income they do not have to pay a penny and do not pay in full till net income is over $30,000. Sounds fair to me.

Pretty soon the demographics are going to be such that there will be a huge number of seniors, living longer and using the medical system more. Why shouldn’t they pay if they can afford it?

I say make MSP income tested and even use a sliding scale of sorts. If you are a senior on a 60K a year pension, you can afford it. If you are a senior living only on CPP or OAS, then no, you shouldn’t pay.

Let’s apply some common sense here.

Yeah those darn liberals. I cant wait for an NDP government to come in and save the day. They can solve child poverty, raise the minimum wage, raise the welfare rates, lower MSP premiums, widen all the highways, lower ferry tolls, lower car insurance and balance the budget all while stopping resource extraction, saving the environment and getting all of those dastardly corporations to go away. It will be a socialist nirvana.
*sarcasm off*

Chart with premium rates.

http://www.health.gov.bc.ca/msp/infoben/premium.html

Thanks for that link ewitt.

I think it would be reasonable to re-work that structure. Starting to pay at $22K seems a little on the low side to me, whereas someone making 100K paying the same as someone making $30K also seems a little unbalanced.

I looked up the median income of seniors in Canada. The number for 2008 was $45,400 for a husband and wife living together.

Since this typical couple of seniors would only pay income tax on about $10- $20K of their income due to various tax credits personal, age, pension etc. I fail to understand why people seem to think that these seniors should also get out of paying MSP.

One of the comments above…..”they have paid for 30-40 years into the system”…….So what? By that logic Hydro, Cable and every other expense that you paid in your lifetime should be free as well. There’s a word for a system like this “Dreamland”……!!!!!!

If seniors have enough income then they can help pay for the system Like another person commented, they are one of the biggest users of the system afterall.

Wow. There’s actually people making sense here and making some good points. Usually, every thread is overrun by leftist nonsense.

We better get crackin’. Christy’s son Hamish is about 12 years old and we don’t want there to be a provincial debt when he reaches adulthood. ;-)

Who do we owe this debt to?

Nice to see some common sense comments here!

Some of the richest people that I know are seniors. In addition to their large bank accounts and investment holdings, they also no longer have a mortgage.

Contrast that to a young family living on one income, with a family to raise and a mortgage to pay.

Who has a greater ability to pay MSP premiums?

That’s not to say that all seniors are mortgage free and with large bank accounts, nor are all young families struggling. Thee are people in the province with the ability to pay and others who find it difficult to pay and this has little if anything to do with age! The thought that ALL seniors should not have to pay MSP is absolutely unreasonable!

I wish that the government would eliminate the MSP premium altogether, get rid of the bureaucracy that exists to collect and manage it and instead simply increased everyone’s taxes a bit. Those in lower tax brackets would see less of an increase and those in higher tax brackets would pay a higher rate or surcharge or whatever you want to call it!

There is already a system in place that provides premium assiatance to those at lower income levels, so perhaps that in itself is sufficient!

I should get an exemption since they cannot supply me with a family doctor.

Danger.
Compromised from within.

Caspers.

NoWay:- “Who do we owe this debt to?”
——————————————–
You just asked the forbidden question, NoWay.

Lets see if you get any answers at all, let alone any forbidden ones.

NMG, based on your comment, you would like the Ontario Health Plan rates, which are based on income, and is a component of income tax.

Here is their OHP rate chart based on income levels. Seems fairer, and more comprehensive, than B.C.’s, but you probably know this living in Ottawa.

http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/tax/healthpremium/rates.html

Let us look at car insurance and health insurance.

If you are a good driver with no claims for a long time you get around 40% off your regular rate.

The same with house insurance … you have not claims, your risk is shown to be low, thus you get a lower rate until you start having claims.

The health care system in Canada is supposed to be “free” for needed services, rather than optional services. In fact, in most places in Canada that is the case.

BC is one of the few exceptions. Why????

If they are going to have major injuries or diseases or simply the normal results of getting old, then, if we follow the general principles of insurance fee setting, those with the most claims should be paying more.

It is also totally against our traditional graduated tax system where those with the least income pay a lower percentage than the ones with higher income.

That is one of the reasons for the continuing growing gap between low and high income earners.

Does anyone know where the policies are which generate these processes which decreases equity?

I love that cartoon posted today showing the difference between equality and equity. Well done!!!

Paying MSPayments and not having your own family doctor? Maybe you should sue them for breach of contract. Exactly what are you paying for? I don’t ever recollect getting a contract with them after signing up. Ask them for one and find out how much small print there is in it. Maybe the fine print doesn’t guarantee you a doc.

That median income for a senior couple of $45,000 is pretty low considering that if both worked for much of their lives, which most have done these days, they should be collecting around $18,000 each per year from CPP and OAS. Even the smallest RRSP will boost that income to the $45,000 ….

Remember, median means that half of those couples make less than $45,000 and not all of them have a house which is paid off. And they are getting older by the day and have to pay for more services to maintain the house they used to be able to maintain themselves.

My mother is 89, still lives in her house, does not want to go to a home, but if she does, she will have monthly expenses which add up to much more than $45,000/year and she is only one person.

BTW, she has no more need to access the medical health system than the average person half her age.

FYI…..Any income from TFSAs is tax free and not included in their income to calculate premiums..

Just as a point of interest, does anyone know how much a gold-plated MLA pensioner pays for MSP, extended medical, dental and life insurance? Pat Bell and Bruce Strachan come to mind.

My guess would be that all Civil servants, and Politicians, Teachers, etc; have their MSP paid for by the Government.

In addition a large number of people in the private sector have their MSP paid for by their employers.

Seems there is a disconnect here, between those who can negotiate from a strong position, and those who cant.

I am not quite sure why anyone would want to open up a Tax Free Savings Account.

The money put into those accounts is after tax money. When you withdraw that money, you do not have to pay tax a second time ….. so why is that unique?

The interest on those accounts is currently around a whopping (not the sarcasm) 1%. A person could get poor on that kind of investment rate.

Put in $5,500 after tax money, which is the current maximum allowed, and if you have it in and RBC account you get $55 dollars at the end of the year, which is tax free. The $5,500 has already been taxed and will not be taxed again.

How generous.

I prefer to invest my money in self directed RRSPs …. at least one has a chance to make a reasonable percentage …. all the money that sits in an RRSP is taxable because the deposited money has not been taxed in the first place since it was tax deductible at the time of deposit.

You remove it when your annual earnings are lower and you may be in a lower income tax bracket.

gus, are you aware that Tax Free Savings Accounts aren’t restricted to interest earning deposits only?

My TFSA is made up of a number of investment accounts with my life insurance company. At this point in time, my holdings are 100% Stock Market based. In 2013, some of my accounts earned over 34%, while the rest made in the mid to high 20% range.

So, on $5,500.00, I made almost $1,500.00. Assuming a 40% combined tax rate, I saved over $600.00 in taxes!

That’s why I buy a Tax Free Savings Account! By the way, my RRSP holdings are invested in the same asset classes so they did very well also!!

Hart Guy is right. You can do a self-directed TFSA. That said, to do RSP vs TFSA depends on the exit tax rate. Say right now you pay tax at a marginal rate of 30%. If when you take the money out, you expect that rate to be lower, the RSP is the way to go, if you expect it to be the same or higher, the TFSA is the way to go.

Example, Johnny invests $10,000 at 5% for 20 years in his RSP. Because an RSP is tax deductible, this amount is pre-tax. In 10 years he will have $26532.00. He’s in the 30% tax bracket when he retires, and takes the money out. He ends up with $18572.00

Mary invests only $7,000 in a TFSA, because she has to use after tax money, but she’s not taxed on the interest. $7,000 invested at 5% for 10 years, is $18572.00 and not taxed when pulled out. The investment rate doesn’t matter. It can be 200%, and the numbers will end up the same as long as the tax rate in and out is the same.

Now, if the tax rates when the money was put in was 30%, but only 20% when pulled out, Johnny is the big winner because he’d have $21226.00 when he takes it out.

JB:”No doubt about it, our ‘free’ medical system is very expensive and that trend isn’t reversing any time soon.”

True enough! But then think about this:

Without having your health problems looked after professionally you either pass on – no need for an education budget, bridges, highways or any other expensive thing – or you are too ill to work and contribute much to society – no need for education, an education budget, etc.!

So, how important is ‘free’ healthcare and the money to look after it?

Gus – Ski50 knows what they are talking about here. TFSA are very useful for people with a high income after retirement. If you have investments, pensions etc totalling over 70k per year after retirement (and dont kid yourself, ALOT of people around here do) and you come of age that you are forced to pull from your rrsps you are going to get double hammered on taxes and CPP clawbacks and wish you had the money in TFSAs. They both have thier place in retirement planning. It is alot more complicated than that but I hope you get my meaning :)