Reforming Old Age Security Without Generational Conflict
The frustration animating calls to reform Old Age Security (OAS) is understandable. Younger Canadians face a housing market that feels rigged, tuition costs that have outpaced wages, and child-rearing expenses that strain family budgets.
On the facts, the generational comparison is real: Many baby boomers had an easier path into homeownership and post-secondary education than today’s young adults.
But the debate goes wrong in prescribing blunt remedies – particularly proposals to sharply curtail or eliminate OAS for senior couples with gross incomes around $180,000 and redirect those funds to low-income seniors and younger Canadians. This has a Robin Hood appeal, but rests on a narrow reading of income, taxation, and the financial risks people face late in life.
OAS and the Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS) are Canada’s largest social programs, costing more than $80 billion annually and rising steadily as the population ages. As Ottawa enters a period of fiscal restraint alongside productivity-boosting investments, reviewing these programs is both reasonable and necessary. But framing reform as “young versus old” risks distracting from the program’s policy objectives and the many other issues younger generations need addressed.
