Editor;

In the past, there has been much public sympathy for the plight of seniors. This has led to various financial support mechanisms that have greatly improved the senior's lot. Now, however, there is more of a move toward public sympathy for the plight of young people. However, assisting young people will require money (as it did and still does in assisting seniors). One obvious source of this required money is our more well off seniors who have been able to accumulate substantial assets, due in part to generous government assistance. Frankly, I am one of those well off seniors although I credit some of that to my abstemious lifestyle - eg never been on a "cruise"!)
All governments are biased towards old people because old people vote and governments are biased against young people because they don't. For example. governments now allow people to work longer by having removed the arbitrary retirement age (this doesn't help young people! because some older people will work longer). Governments now will delay people getting the Old Age Pension until they are 67 (this doesn't help young people because older people will have to work longer).
The proper thing to do, of course (and this is just one example) is to start paying out less OAS by clawing back some of it from those who don't need it (like me). My wife and I collect $13,529.76 OAS from the government each year. (Admittedly, some of this does go right back to the government as tax on income.) With my wife and I, this money just piles up in our TFSA accounts, from which our children will get the full amount, since TFSAs are not taxed like our RIFS are. Other people will spend their OAS in France or Italy (which doesn't help either our local economy nor our young people).
The solution of course is for young people to become more politically active but I'm not even sure if young people will read this letter.

Bill Moses
Owen Sound ON