ZingyDNA said:
If you really have to put it this way, then, no, I don't have a problem with the pro-rated benefit system for CPP and Old Age Security. In your words, it is EARNED by how long/how much you contributed to the system.
Let continue on with your logic then, with health care. It has to be EARNED by how long/how much you contributed to the system (i.e. by paying taxes), right? I have always maintained that there are Canadians who don't pay taxes to the system, both inside or outside Canada. They should be treated the same as neither of them earned health care?
PS there is a flaw in your logic, though, which is why I don't think you can entirely equate CPP to health care. Let's say, I worked/paid taxes in Canada for 10 years, then I move to the US for 5 years. Should I get health care when I come back? How would you even pro-rate my health care, like 30%, 50%, 80%?? Isn't there lots of practical difficulties?
The difference with those who don't pay taxes in Canada is that they remain in Canada. Whether they choose to remain in Canada or can't afford to leave Canada, doesn't change the fact they are IN Canada. The big difference is that those that leave Canada do it out of their own conscious choice.
You still didn't address the issue of sponsored parents/grandparents accessing free medical care. So until you address the fairness of them getting access to it, please don't give me examples of Canadians/PR not paying taxes in Canada having access to medical care as comparison. Remember the parents/grandparents were NOT or NEVER WERE residents of Canada before they became PRs.
I agree implementing a pro-rated system to the medical care system will be hard to accomplished. But I am sure there are ways to come up with it.
One way, for every year absence, you must put in 5% extra income tax toward medical care. If out of canada for 5 years, pay 5% taxes for 5 years. Not 100% perfect but at least the medical cost is recuperate somehow.
Another example: using 40 work year rule, for every year outside Canada, you pay a percentage difference. So each year absence, you pay 2.5% on medical expenses. So out of Canada 5 years, you pay 12.5% of the medical cost. As you approach the 40 working years in Canada, the 12.5% gets dropped pro-rated. In this case, you still get full medical access but you pay the medical difference cost out of your own pocket. This approach would be the most realistic approach. Those that claim discrimination have to explain why they left Canada out of their free will. Had they remained in Canada, they wouldn't be discriminated.
No difference from the medication expenses. If you are working, you pay 10%-20% of the prescription. Retired/unemployed people have to pay 100% of the cost themselves. So if we can pay 10%-20% of the prescriptions, we can apply the same. You pay the medical cost yourself a percentage for every year out of Canada.
Now you could bring up the "retired people" living outside Canada, but remember as long as you put in your 40 working years like you do with CPP, Old Age, these people can get full medical benefits when they come back as they did put in their 40 years inside Canada if they need medical care. After all, they have earned their free medical care benefit by putting in 40 working years in Canada before they left Canada for retirement. They contributed to Canada's economy and taxes during their working years.
So a Canadian born can leave Canada at age 20 for work for many year until retirement and then come back to Canada. He/she would have to pay 100% of medical cost since he/she haven't put in their 40 years in Canada. Each year passed in retirement, their medical expenses drop 2.5%. This would make them think twice about taking advantage of Canada free medical care when it isn't free. This way they accept the consequences of their choice in leaving Canada for a length of time.
