How does it affect citizens either way? Isn’t it the same amount of money? Won’t it work like QPP where if you leave the province, they do transfers with CPP to ensure you get all your pension no matter where you live when you retire? What difference does it make who holds the money? Please objective answers only, I’m not looking for how individuals feel about it either way.
In: 3
Well, for one thing, Quebecers are contributing 1% more annually to their plan than other Canadians are to the CPP. There is little evidence to expect that Albertans will not end up in the same situation (ie paying more for a similar return).
Then there is the argument that the Alberta government is making regarding how much of the CPP the Province should get in any withdrawal from the system.
Third, many seniors in Alberta would likely see their payouts decreased should Alberta withdraw simply because of this debate over “how much”.
Lastly, the CPP is one of the BEST managed funds on the planet in terms of it’s ROI. Why would anyone want to bail out of something as successful as CPP for some ephemeral “promise” of a better deal?
I thought it was a stupid idea when the Liberals were proposing something similar in Ontario and, were I living in Alberta, I would think THIS is a stupid idea now. That said, I am retiring in a year, so my biases are clear.
Well, for one thing, Quebecers are contributing 1% more annually to their plan than other Canadians are to the CPP. There is little evidence to expect that Albertans will not end up in the same situation (ie paying more for a similar return).
Then there is the argument that the Alberta government is making regarding how much of the CPP the Province should get in any withdrawal from the system.
Third, many seniors in Alberta would likely see their payouts decreased should Alberta withdraw simply because of this debate over “how much”.
Lastly, the CPP is one of the BEST managed funds on the planet in terms of it’s ROI. Why would anyone want to bail out of something as successful as CPP for some ephemeral “promise” of a better deal?
I thought it was a stupid idea when the Liberals were proposing something similar in Ontario and, were I living in Alberta, I would think THIS is a stupid idea now. That said, I am retiring in a year, so my biases are clear.
The main difference is that the Alberta provincial government gets to decide what they do with it. Keep contributions the same, increase them, decrease them. It’s the same with payouts.
QPP and CPP have historically been close to each other on purpose, but it could also have gone very differently. If there were an APP, it could be the same or go very differently.
Why Québec often goes it alone is a whole other discussion and there is a whole historical context to it that you could argue goes all the way back to 1763 and it’s something I don’t want to get into.
The main difference is that the Alberta provincial government gets to decide what they do with it. Keep contributions the same, increase them, decrease them. It’s the same with payouts.
QPP and CPP have historically been close to each other on purpose, but it could also have gone very differently. If there were an APP, it could be the same or go very differently.
Why Québec often goes it alone is a whole other discussion and there is a whole historical context to it that you could argue goes all the way back to 1763 and it’s something I don’t want to get into.
Risk.
We assume all the risk of an aging population. Right now, Albertans are demographically younger so are in their contributing years. If interprovincial migration occurs, or the population of Alberta follows what happened in Quebec, our premiums will exceed that of the CPP.
We assume the risk of allowing provincial government to use our pension money as they see fit. There are no assurances any Alberta government can give that mitigates this risk as any legislation passed by this government can be changed just as easily by the next. The CPP has a much higher bar because major changes will require something like a majority of the provinces to agree.
It hampers your freedom of movement within Canada. The QPP has harmonized benefits with the CPP, so that makes it easy for people to transfer between plans if they retire outside or inside Quebec. Whereas Smith has been selling the APP as being able to pay out higher benefits. If this were to occur, how is this going to work if a person decides to retire on Vancouver Island, or Kelowna, or the Maritimes? We have no information on anything like this. Because there is no plan, just a sales job.
Why does Smith want to pull out? Well, it’s to satisfy the rump in the countryside that wants a sovereign Alberta. It’s one more step to making Alberta independence go smoother.
Risk.
We assume all the risk of an aging population. Right now, Albertans are demographically younger so are in their contributing years. If interprovincial migration occurs, or the population of Alberta follows what happened in Quebec, our premiums will exceed that of the CPP.
We assume the risk of allowing provincial government to use our pension money as they see fit. There are no assurances any Alberta government can give that mitigates this risk as any legislation passed by this government can be changed just as easily by the next. The CPP has a much higher bar because major changes will require something like a majority of the provinces to agree.
It hampers your freedom of movement within Canada. The QPP has harmonized benefits with the CPP, so that makes it easy for people to transfer between plans if they retire outside or inside Quebec. Whereas Smith has been selling the APP as being able to pay out higher benefits. If this were to occur, how is this going to work if a person decides to retire on Vancouver Island, or Kelowna, or the Maritimes? We have no information on anything like this. Because there is no plan, just a sales job.
Why does Smith want to pull out? Well, it’s to satisfy the rump in the countryside that wants a sovereign Alberta. It’s one more step to making Alberta independence go smoother.
Latest Answers