Quebec Student Protests: "It’s the older generation that’s entitled, not students"

• BobYoMeowMeow wrote on 2012-05-26 05:59

  “Entitlement.” We hear that word associated again and again with student protesters in Quebec. Usually, it’s preceded by the words, “sense of.”
  
  “They think someone owes them a living,” disgruntled critics harrumph. “Wait until they get into the real world.”
  
  Setting aside the fact that this intergenerational hectoring dates back to Socrates, let us ask: Who exactly is making the charge? Quebec has had low tuition rates for a half century. That means almost every living adult in the province, having already been afforded a plum goodie, is now wagging his finger at the first generation that will be asked to pay the tab. So who really is entitled here?
  
  Canadians now aged 55 years and older will collect Old Age Security when they hit 65. The rest of us will have to work two more years. Those who came of age in the 1960s enjoyed Employment Insurance and Medicare when they were still unfunded liabilities. They cash a Canada Pension cheque that depends upon today’s working men and women. The plan probably won’t exist by the time the rest of us reach whatever age of retirement the government decrees by the time we are old.
  
  In the 1970s, parents pulled on the (now discontinued) Family Allowance program. The employed could count on a level of job security that allowed them to take on debt to own houses, cottages and cars. They paid them off and retired to indexed pensions.
  
  It’s almost like Canadians had a “sense of entitlement,” or something.
  
  In the ’90s, this same well-entitled generation began the drumbeat for lower taxes, never once offering up a government program they were willing to sacrifice. When the economy tanked, it fell to money-starved governments to bail everyone out. Today’s youth had nothing to do with that profligacy, but are being called upon to “grow up” and shoulder the adult responsibility of paying the debt off.
  
  We hear a great deal these days about how we have to be reasonable about the times we live in. Corporate officers pulling in massive salaries and bonuses even as their companies lose money say average working men and women have to understand that the age of job security, pensions and even a middle-class wage are behind us. Have any of them offered to take the lead by surrendering even a fraction of their benefits? Are Federal Labour Minister Lisa Rait and Quebec Premier Jean Charest prepared to trim their gold-plated pensions to set an example to the students and workers they condescendingly lecture about the “new reality”?
  
  Today’s youth face a grim future not of their own making. Is it any wonder that they’re angry about it? What they are asking for is what previous generations so eagerly gobbled up for themselves. If those generations now believe their entitlements were too generous, then, perhaps, in the spirit of sharing the burden, they might want to give some of them back.
  
  Didn’t think so.

  
  
  http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/05/24/john-moore-its-the-older-generation-thats-entitled-not-students/
  
  and minimum wage jobs are overtaken by young Canadians and the old Canadians
• MareneCorp wrote on 2012-05-26 06:14
  There's no limit to greed.
• paladin wrote on 2012-05-26 15:04
  Thats kinda right lol
  Its worse in america
  most of us younger gens wont have social security at all lol
• Spartaaaaa wrote on 2012-05-26 18:44

  Quote from paladin;873347:

  Thats kinda right lol
  Its worse in america
  most of us younger gens wont have social security at all lol

  
  
  lol social security is such a joke. Does the government really think that Americans are incapable of making their own savings? Instead of taking money out of our paychecks and "saving it up for us", why can't they just let us plan our own retirement savings on our own terms?
• paladin wrote on 2012-05-26 20:02

  Quote from Spartaaaaa;873436:

  lol social security is such a joke. Does the government really think that Americans are incapable of making their own savings? Instead of taking money out of our paychecks and "saving it up for us", why can't they just let us plan our own retirement savings on our own terms?

  
  
  thats the very last thing i expect from you
  You of all people should know how lazy and uncaring americans can be
  historical example
  one major reason people got screwed in the great depression was they invested in the stock market too heavily and when it crashed their savings went poof
• Yoorah wrote on 2012-05-26 23:18
  Indeed. The idea of entrusting said people to be responsible and have savings set aside for a rainy day is just hilarious.
  
  And the arguments offered by the students are simply stupid, lol.
  "u had it gud so y we haz 2 have it worse?? u keep payin 4 us plz!!1 i dun caer dat we haz no moar moneyz!111"
  
  I won't argue against the very likely possibility that the financial system is rigged to give certain people more opportunities, but as far as the tuition cost increases, it's only fair given what the rest of us in Canada pay (which in turn is less than what people pay for University in the US, although the US is on the other extreme of the stupidity spectrum in this regard, so I suppose this argument isn't that strong).
  
  I just feel bad for people who actually have to live and work in Montreal right now. They're the ones who have to put up with this BS IRL.
• Sinned wrote on 2012-05-27 00:35

  Quote from paladin;873461:

  thats the very last thing i expect from you
  You of all people should know how lazy and uncaring americans can be

  
  
  And then they blame all the immigrants who actually worked their butt off.
• Spartaaaaa wrote on 2012-05-27 21:49

  Quote from paladin;873461:

  thats the very last thing i expect from you
  You of all people should know how lazy and uncaring americans can be
  historical example
  one major reason people got screwed in the great depression was they invested in the stock market too heavily and when it crashed their savings went poof

  
  
  Right, and the phasing out of social security would definitely sober us up and force Americans to take responsibility. The more "safety nets" we get, the more reckless we get.
• paladin wrote on 2012-05-27 23:59

  Quote from Spartaaaaa;873974:

  Right, and the phasing out of social security would definitely sober us up and force Americans to take responsibility. The more "safety nets" we get, the more reckless we get.

  
  
  You do know that social security did not exist pre depression right?
  this is before we had any safety nets
  If we screwed it up badly back then
  we will do it again
  Americans tend to repeat history alot
• Osayidan wrote on 2012-05-28 00:09

  Quote from Yoorah;873517:

  I just feel bad for people who actually have to live and work in Montreal right now. They're the ones who have to put up with this BS IRL.

  
  
  :gloom2:
• Spartaaaaa wrote on 2012-05-28 10:02

  Quote from paladin;874047:

  You do know that social security did not exist pre depression right?
  this is before we had any safety nets
  If we screwed it up badly back then
  we will do it again
  Americans tend to repeat history alot

  
  
  So does that mean that it's the government's job to babysit people who can't manage their own money? Besides there were already welfare programs in place during the depression set up during the gilded age.
• BobYoMeowMeow wrote on 2012-05-28 10:27

  Quote from Spartaaaaa;873974:

  Right, and the phasing out of social security would definitely sober us up and force Americans to take responsibility. The more "safety nets" we get, the more reckless we get.

  
  
  expecting dull people to pay attention to whatever the government does
  funny
• paladin wrote on 2012-05-28 18:30
  its funny how he thinks people on wel fare will suddenly have money to save
  or they are not saving already
  The largest majority of people on welfare are on it for a reason
  But then again you dont even represent the ideals that the church represents so why am I surprised
• Spartaaaaa wrote on 2012-05-28 19:48

  Quote from BobYoMeowMeow;874375:

  expecting dull people to pay attention to whatever the government does
  funny

  
  
  Implying that people don't know that social security exists?
  
  

  Quote from paladin;874549:

  its funny how he thinks people on wel fare will suddenly have money to save
  or they are not saving already
  The largest majority of people on welfare are on it for a reason
  But then again you dont even represent the ideals that the church represents so why am I surprised

  
  
  People are on welfare because they are either a) too lazy to get a job/too addicted to welfare, or b) cannot get a job because of minimum wage laws and other such regulations. Also consider that more welfare implies that more money is being forcefully taken out of the economy to fund said welfare. Inevitably, liberals will demand that "the rich" get taxed more, and it just so happens that "the rich" are the ones creating a lot of the jobs. So it's a vicious cycle, more welfare --> higher taxes --> fewer jobs --> more welfare, and bang! We're on the road to serfdom.
  
  If you feel the need to disguise part of your comment in white font, then consider sending that part of your comment to me in a private message or as a comment on my profile. Thank you.
• paladin wrote on 2012-05-28 19:50
  Outside of the whole welfare thing
  are you implying minium wage is a bad thing?