溫哥華老友記討論區 - Powered by Discuz! Board

標題: EI保費明年加5仙 [打印本頁]

作者: myversa 時間: 2010-10-1 07:43 標題: EI保費明年加5仙

Have not receive any ei for the last 5 years and yet it continues to increase.

保費增長設上限每百元10仙

(渥太華30日加新社電)財政部長費拉逖(Jim Flaherty﹐圖)周四宣布﹐明年1月1日起輕微調高就業保險(EI)保費5仙﹐加幅低於原來計劃﹐並且限定未來的加幅﹐商界表示歡迎。

費拉逖宣布﹐聯邦政府會調高保費﹐每100元受保收入保費增加5仙。此前政府計劃每100元受保收入保費增加15仙﹐商界團體警告說﹐那會導致數以萬計的人失業﹐傷害脆弱的經濟復蘇。

費拉逖也宣布﹐政府會限制未來就業保險保費增長幅度﹐每100元受保收入保費最多10仙。

他說﹐新措施與原計劃相比﹐明年將為僱主和僱員節省12億元。政府也將2011年就業保險保費上限﹐設定為每100元受保收入最高1.78元。

費拉逖說﹕「這會在脆弱的經濟增長形勢下﹐支持創造就業﹐令商戶及其僱員有更多資金。」

費拉逖也啟動1項全國諮詢活動﹐討論就業保險保費的設定﹐可以「更加改善﹐保證往後有更穩定、可預見的保費。」他補充﹐過去兩年就業保險累積的赤字﹐未來數年就業保險保費需要大幅﹑穩定的增加﹐填補計劃的赤字。

作者: lo_pak 時間: 2010-10-1 08:06

Sounds okay la, although I haven't claimed EI before...

作者: Lik 時間: 2010-10-1 09:10

This is already a reduction of 10 cents compared to what was originally announced. IIRC, the government was looking to increase EI contributions by 15 cents per $100 income, but the economy recovered well enough that EI contributions only need to go up by 5 cent per $100.

Besides, if you haven't relied on EI for the last few years, shouldn't you be thankful that you have a secure job?

-Lik

作者: sheep 時間: 2010-10-1 09:20

先嚇吓你
話要加15％
然後
話淨係加你5％啦
我哋係唔係要歡呼呢？

有需要又有理據嘅
加幾多都有商量
為去整靚盤數
然後就分花紅？
我唔係水魚

作者: lo_pak 時間: 2010-10-1 09:25

回復 4# sheep

It's way better than ICBC...

作者: 快樂牛郎 時間: 2010-10-1 09:41

本帖最後由快樂牛郎於 2010-10-1 09:43 編輯

Besides, if you haven't relied on EI for the last few years, shouldn't you be thankful that you have a secure job?Lik 發表於 2010/10/1 09:10

Shouldn't people in HK be thankful that they weren't born in rural Africa then? Why do they still complain so much?

"Insurance" such as EI doesn't make sense because it punishes the winners to compensate the losers.

作者: Lik 時間: 2010-10-1 11:06

Shouldn't people in HK be thankful that they weren't born in rural Africa then? Why do they still complain so much?

"Insurance" such as EI doesn't make sense because it punishes the winners to compensate the losers.
快樂牛郎發表於 2010-10-1 09:41

People in HK are complaining because of the social injustice they face every single day. The rich are hoarding all the wealth while the poor have no chance at social mobility.

Being the compassionless extreme right wing conservative that you are, of course you do not believe in social justice nor safety nets. When the day comes where you got fired, couldn't find a job, and couldn't afford your meds, you'd be singing a different tone.

-Lik

作者: 快樂牛郎 時間: 2010-10-1 14:50

Being the compassionless extreme right wing conservative that you are, of course you do not believe in social justice nor safety nets. When the day comes where you got fired, couldn't find a job, and couldn't afford your meds, you'd be singing a different tone.Lik 發表於 2010/10/1 11:06

I have exactly the same standards that I have for others for myself. If i get fired, I don't expect to receive EI if I don't support it. I support a natural selection process, so things like EI just artificially make those people survive who are unable to otherwise.

作者: Lik 時間: 2010-10-1 15:22

I have exactly the same standards that I have for others for myself. If i get fired, I don't expect to receive EI if I don't support it. I support a natural selection process, so things like EI just artificially make those people survive who are unable to otherwise.
快樂牛郎發表於 2010-10-1 14:50

True, and this is why I still have a certain level of respect for you. But that doesn't change the fact that you are a compassionless extreme right wing conservative elitist. More importantly, you don't really know if your attitude will change should you get laid off, get seriously ill, etc.

-Lik

作者: 快樂牛郎 時間: 2010-10-1 15:40

More importantly, you don't really know if your attitude will change should you get laid off, get seriously ill, etc.Lik 發表於 2010/10/1 15:22

You can surely say that now, but at the same time when you bash the government and the filthy rich, you also don't know whether you will do exactly the same thing when you are in their position. You are just fighting for all those causes right now because you are part of the group that will benefit from the changes you want.

作者: yokult 時間: 2010-10-1 15:42

I kinda agree with 快樂牛郎. The way Canadian system works is that it promotes working less or even not working.

Say you make 10k more, you only get to keep 60% of it. Then why work hard?
Why not just collect EI? at least get back the portion you contributed!

作者: 快樂牛郎 時間: 2010-10-1 15:56

本帖最後由快樂牛郎於 2010-10-1 15:58 編輯

Eventually nature will take over when all governments are bankrupt and drown in debt. So you pretend to be a humanitarian and tries to extend benefits to everyone in this world. Guess what, there's never enough resources for everybody and the longer you keep the imbalance the worse the outcome will be.

Capitalism actually never failed. What failed in the US is a faux capitalism system within a real socialistic and "democratic" environment.

作者: BiscottiGelato 時間: 2010-10-1 16:17

Eventually nature will take over when all governments are bankrupt and drown in debt. So you preten ...
快樂牛郎發表於 2010-10-1 15:56

Well said. Can't say it any better.

作者: fibbi 時間: 2010-10-1 16:19

回復 11# yokult

True, if there's a job w/ 5K more I'd rather not moving....
Just because of the taxation it takes away my incentive to make more...

作者: Lik 時間: 2010-10-1 18:02

You can surely say that now, but at the same time when you bash the government and the filthy rich, you also don't know whether you will do exactly the same thing when you are in their position. You are just fighting for all those causes right now because you are part of the group that will benefit from the changes you want.
快樂牛郎發表於 2010-10-1 15:40

所以呢個世界上有啲人我係極為敬佩嘅，例如毓民就係當中嘅表表者。毓民早年絕對發過大達，但係佢對社會同民主卻從來都無背棄過。而我自己亦一定唔會有你所講嘅問題，因為我知道自己永遠都唔會有發達嘅一日。

I kinda agree with 快樂牛郎. The way Canadian system works is that it promotes working less or even not working.

Say you make 10k more, you only get to keep 60% of it. Then why work hard?
Why not just collect EI? at least get back the portion you contributed!
yokult 發表於 2010-10-1 15:42

阿哥仔你就此言差矣喇～加拿大個 system 唔係 promote 叫人懶，而係叫人應該追求高質素同全面嘅生活。高質素生活並非只係物質上富裕咁簡單。就算你搵多多錢都好，你無時間洗、無時間享受生活、無時間、機會去同家人同朋友分享嘅話，咁又有咩用？

而你有能力嘅去搵得多啲錢嘅話，響同舟共濟嘅觀念之下自然就好應該負擔多啲來幫吓其他人。話晒呢個世界風水輪流轉，今日你幫人，他朝咪人哋幫返你囉。

-力

作者: yokult 時間: 2010-10-2 06:51

no, if I have to work 2 more hours every day to get paid 10k more, I rather not do it. With this tax system, it is not worth it. You dont have time to enjoy life like you said.

just get a low paid job, enjoy government benefit, and enjoy life. That's totally how I feel.

作者: Lik 時間: 2010-10-2 08:45

Whoa~ Working 2 hours more everyday will make you another $10k? That's a salary of $38/hr. I dunno about you, but I think a lot of people would be more than willing to do this.

(FYI, $38/hr works out to $70k/yr, assuming a minimal 35 hrs work week. If you work 40 hrs work weeks, you're at $80k. I dunno exactly what income percentile this level of income would place you, but the average Canadian only makes around $40k, if I am not mistaken. So even at $70k, that is already a very healthy salary. Also, I think the highest tax bracket comes in at around $70k+).

But hey, if you don't care to make that $38/hr, then I guess you must value your time more than that $38, and that's good!

-Lik

作者: 快樂牛郎 時間: 2010-10-2 11:27

Whoa~ Working 2 hours more everyday will make you another $10k? That's a salary of $38/hr. I dunno about you, but I think a lot of people would be more than willing to do this.
Lik 發表於 2010/10/2 08:45

He could mean a pre-tax income of $10K, which comes to $20 an hour

作者: 快樂牛郎 時間: 2010-10-2 11:35

本帖最後由快樂牛郎於 2010-10-2 11:37 編輯

Being the compassionless extreme right wing conservative that you are
Lik 發表於 2010/10/1 11:06

Calling other people names is easy, isn't it. While a lot of people think they are very generous and compassionate, they are doing damages to society in ways that they don't even notice. Just a simple example. By providing a top-notch living environment to prisoners, you are 1) increasing the probability that the prisoner will endanger the society when he/she comes out, 2) adding an enormous burden to the public budget 3) waste or misallocate public resources throughout the entire legal process.

Examples like this are abundant where we spend a great deal of resources to protect the "personal rights" of a very small number of individuals in the name of "equality" and "justice" at the expense of the greater public. Under such a system, eventually resources will run out and everybody dies.

作者: 快樂牛郎 時間: 2010-10-2 11:41

It's funny that a judge in California suspended capital executions because he thinks that the process is "inhumane" and "cruel". I don't know how "humane" this guy was when he raped and killed a 13 years old before he went to jail. We might as well let everybody out of jail for free since we care for their well beings so much.

作者: Lik 時間: 2010-10-2 12:11

He could mean a pre-tax income of $10K, which comes to $20 an hour
快樂牛郎發表於 2010-10-2 11:27

Oh crap, you're right. It should have been $19.something / hr. Must have had a brain fart when I did the math.

I hardly think prisons could be considered a top notch living environment, although in certain northern European countries, minor crimes that results in jail sentencing do send the criminals to minimal security prisons where the environment is not too different from regular society, and they report an extremely low rate of crime there to begin with. But with US prisons busting at its seams, prisons' living quarters are crowded and are definitely not a comfortable place to be. As long as basic human rights (food, shelter, security, etc.) are guaranteed, that is already quite enough.

We all know the law is not always just. And in certain countries, it happens far more often la.

-Lik

作者: 快樂牛郎 時間: 2010-10-2 17:38

As long as basic human rights (food, shelter, security, etc.) are guaranteed, that is already quite enough.
Lik 發表於 2010/10/2 12:11

A top notch environment compared to the shxtholes they would be living in if they weren't in prison. A prisoner costs the government $30,000 a year. A lot of people don't even make that much money in a year.

作者: Lik 時間: 2010-10-3 08:29

A top notch environment compared to the shxtholes they would be living in if they weren't in priso ...
快樂牛郎發表於 2010-10-2 17:38

Again, the fact you state is entirely correct. However, what about the cost to society if the criminal is not locked up? If the criminal would result in $60k's worth of damages had he not been locked up, then society is saving $30k right there.

-Lik

作者: 快樂牛郎 時間: 2010-10-3 12:31

Again, the fact you state is entirely correct. However, what about the cost to society if the criminal is not locked up? If the criminal would result in $60k's worth of damages had he not been locked up, then society is saving $30k right there.
Lik 發表於 2010/10/3 08:29

What's the cost to society if we just execute the guy? $0
Of course this is assuming we do this asap and do not allow any legal processes.

作者: Lik 時間: 2010-10-3 13:44

The cost of execution could be minimal, but the repercussions could be quite serious.

China is the leading country in the world in terms of the number of executions performed, but people continue to lie, cheat, rob, etc. As a matter of fact, I think being sentenced to die so rather easily in China is part of the reason why serious crimes are so common. If getting caught in bank robbery can get you a death sentence already, why wouldn't you kill off a couple of people when you escape to ensure that you can run away?

In general, 治亂世用重典 is an utterly poor policy, but that is what China is doing.

-Lik

作者: 快樂牛郎 時間: 2010-10-3 14:55

TChina is the leading country in the world in terms of the number of executions performed, but people continue to lie, cheat, rob, etc. As a matter of fact, I think being sentenced to die so rather easily in China is part of the reason why serious crimes are so common. If getting caught in bank robbery can get you a death sentence already, why wouldn't you kill off a couple of people when you escape to ensure that you can run away?
Lik 發表於 2010/10/3 13:44

I seriously doubt it. People rob banks because they need money, and their lives were already fxxked regardless whether they did it or not. If you need to kill a few to get away, I don't think it matters whether u receive a life sentence or execution. There's no comparison here because you don't know what the crime rate would be when there was no capital punishment in China. Comparing the crime rate in China vs. the rest of the world would never tell you whether execution is the right way to do. But two things are for sure - 1) cost is lower 2) there's no chance for them to recommit another crime

作者: sheep 時間: 2010-10-3 15:05

I seriously doubt it. People rob banks because they need money, and their lives were already fxxke ...
快樂牛郎發表於 2010-10-3 14:55

so you mean, the judge, law enforcement personnel will loss their jobs if there is a capital punishment

歡迎光臨溫哥華老友記討論區 (http://www.loyaukee.com/forum/)