The question he asks, both rhetorically and substantively is, “do you love your children?” If any rational human being would self-evidently answer “yes”, Galloway invites older people to contemplate what could be done to give their children and grandchildren similar opportunities.
As a financial planner and as a person with an interest in public-policy debates, I believe a ‘Made in Canada’ solution could involve moving the goal posts for old age security (OAS). One way to be less punitive toward the young is to be less generous toward the old. This is categorically not an attempt to engage in intergenerational conflict, but rather an idea, that if implemented purposefully, could reduce intergenerational friction in a way that is both fair and actionable.
In 2024, the maximum OAS is $8,560 a year. That amount is clawed back by $0.15 for every dollar above $90,997. To my mind, giving Canadian retirees over $8,000 a year when they are already making $90,000 a year is obscene. That’s especially the case when we consider how difficult it is for our young adults to launch. To my mind, $90,997 could provide a threshold where OAS would be completely clawed back. It could be enhanced for very low-income earners, let’s say it could pay $10,000 for those earning less than $40,000 a year, and then clawed back at a rate of approximately $0.20 per dollar from that point until reaching $90,000.
Presently, OAS is not completely clawed back unless income exceeds $148,000. Giving government money to a retired senior who is already making over $145,000 a year strikes me as brazenly inappropriate. The principle of universality and use of means testing are both accepted.
The recent change to the capital gains inclusion rate for individuals with over $250,000 annual capital gains strikes me as a modest step in the right direction. We absolutely need to do more. Overwhelmingly, the people who will be paying this higher tax rate are the same people who are already getting overly generous OAS payments. We simply need older, wealthier people to pay more to give Canadians who will make up our workforce in the future a fighting chance. The money saved could be repurposed into any number of initiatives that aim to assist younger Canadians or, at a minimum, the expense foregone could be used to pay down the national debt that we are saddling our children with.