Today's poll question; should workers pay higher unemployment premiums the more often they make EI claims? It doesn't seem fair that a worker who maintains long term continuous employment pay the same rate as someone who makes frequent claims. EI is most certainly not "actuarially fair", the price for insurance which exactly represents the expected losses. I suspect that if the Tories attempted to pass this EI reform, the opposition would rally around the status quo possibly defeating what would be a confidence motion. I'm not sure where public opinion stands on this matter, hence the webpoll. It is sound economic policy, even if the opposition claims it is attacking the unemployed.
Is this legislation the government should consider?
EI premiums?
ReplyDeleteFor starters the LPOC owe the canadian public 56-60Billion which they took from our EI fund plus they owe us another 56-60Billion dollars of which WE, US, were forced to repay with higher premiums.
Put it on Facebook, since the msm are too busy covering up for the liberals very own EI SCANDAL.
This is a very good point Iceman, I know of many seasonal workers who work for their hours, get laid off and then hunt, fish, golf, etc, with no intention of finding other employment. These people go back to work when there pougie runs out, it's a way of life, they don't know the difference.
ReplyDeleteThe EI in Canada was never intended as insurance. it has and will continue to be a wealth transfer scheme. It is used as a political tool to convince people in certain important regions to vote for the party in power. That is why the rules are and always will be convoluted and arbitrary.
ReplyDeleteCheck out the 30% clawback provision too. If you have a too-good paying job and then are unemployed, when you do your income tax up to 30% of your "benefits" can be taxed back. It's not like you can plan ahead for losing your job, and be all prepared not to spend 30% of what you get, which, if you are well-paid, is nothing like your usual pay. "Insurance" my ass! If you make over $50 sum thousand dollars the clawback can hit. What is the philospohy for the "clawback"?
ReplyDeleteEI was an insurance program, now it has become a income gap program for areas that have seasonal unemployment.
ReplyDeleteYes the rates should reflect the region and industry as do pay outs.
If you earn $ 100k your payout should be higher but it is capped against the same person making $ 60k.
We should have a sliding scale for regular users of the entitlement system. (Same with equalization payments)
These entitlement programs are slowing down the migration from have not provinces to regions that "need" and can't fill jobs.
Same idea but on the other side of the equation: I'd like to propose a system where the status quo on EI premiums is maintained but, based on frequency of use, reducing the payout. In other words, everyone continues to pay the same but the more you use the system, the less you receive. Comments?
ReplyDeletePersonally, I like to think that I'm not a total moron and that don't need the government to protect me from a lack of proper planning. Let me choose not to pay any EI premiums, nor be entitled to benefits, and then save my own money to self-insure for the possibility of a job loss.
ReplyDelete