Showing posts with label rights for persons with disabilities. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rights for persons with disabilities. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 8, 2020

OPEN LETTER TO DOUG FORD: COVID-19 AND SOCIAL ASSISTANCE

You are disappointing me.

You are disappointing a whole lot of other people in Ontario.  Not only disappointing, but you are also endangering even more people in Ontario through your actions or rather, lack of actions taken to protect people who are homeless, on OW, ODSP or very low income, from the virus.  In effect, this also hurts others who have to be outdoors.  This is exactly how community spread started, Mr. Ford, because many people have no choice but to be out in the community.

Your message to everybody is to stay home if they can.  Work from home, if they can.  Only go out for absolutely essential trips.  Registered.  Yet, you are talking out of both sides of your mouth, Premier Ford.

On one hand, the well heeled can go home, use their nicely decorated spare rooms to operate their computer and take phone calls redirected from their workplace and thus, protect themselves and in effect, others from this COVID-19 virus.  We see it on TV.  We talk about this online.  This is not real, Premier Ford.

None of these people obviously live with hoarders, where there is no room to spare.  Program funding to assist such persons was cut under your government.  Nobody can work or even live at home under these conditions.  None of the people you are addressing are holed up in a rooming house with addicts, crack dealers and vermin of all kinds.  Kind of difficult to get anything done at "home" in one of those places.  None of these people we are seeing live in homeless shelters.  Tell them to self-isolate all you want, but they don't have the space.

None of these people who you think can "work from home" live in over-crowded conditions either where they have to spend their meagre social assistance cheques to live with three or four other people in the same position, or who couch surf at the home of a friend.  It must be nice, Mr. Ford, to have a room of your own - to work from home.

People on OW and ODSP never received enough to live on.  Many of them are barely alive, suffering from all sorts of malnourishment and fatigue, despite just a few months ago, you contemplated getting more of them to go straight to work.  Straight to jobs that do not exist.  Especially now, that COVID-19 struck the community.  Many or most of these people are immune compromised, not only because of any disability but because they have not eaten well in years.  Food bank food does not enhance people's health.

The federal government has announced a number of measures to assist people who suddenly lost their jobs, are losing revenues from their businesses and so forth, as well as workers who lost a significant portion of their income.  These programs have been developed quickly and put into people's accounts; when gaps were found, the feds stepped in to try to remedy them quickly.  The feds did not disqualify anybody from benefiting from their programs if they relied on provincial programs, such as OW or ODSP.  They opened the door to federal and provincial cooperation; the province of BC responded by increasing their version of OW and ODSP by a few hundred dollars a month and by exempting federal support.  They are also assisting with rent payments, among other supports.

When it came down to you announcing how Ontario was going to respond to the challenges of COVID-19, you failed to take this opportunity to improve the lives of many people whose very lives have been made significantly more difficult under this pandemic.  Your only answer to these people is to stay at home and give hundreds of millions of dollars to charities that really don't do much to improve the lot of these people anyways.  You are telling people to stay home, while at the same time telling these same people, immune-compromised people, to go line up outside of food banks to get three days worth of six month old, mouldy food.  Would it not be better to put more money in the pockets of these people so they can buy their own groceries and get them delivered?  Was this not one of your election promises?

There are also a minority of people on OW or ODSP that may qualify for the federal supports.  This is less than 75,000 people.  To qualify for Canada Emergency Response Benefit (or CERB), all somebody needs to show is they earned at least $5,000 last year or within the prior 12 months and are currently out of work or not receiving self-employment income.  This is currently under review as some people had their hours severely cut, but they are not out of work entirely.

ODSP's response is to tell those that ask that this is EI and they will deduct this dollar for dollar from their ODSP supports.  This is very harmful, especially when a spouse or other family member is the one that has been working and supplementing the family income so they can both eat and live under a roof month after month, but now they are unemployed, they have to choose. Was it not you just a few months ago suggesting that people should try to work when they can?  So they did.  Now what?

Guess what?  These people are not going to stay home!  They are going to find work under the table and will take the virus with them, or take the virus from wherever they go and come home with it ... thus spoiling your campaign to 'flatten the curve'.  Why do you ask?  If you had to choose between the possibility of getting sick or having to live without food every month until the end of this pandemic, what will YOUR choice be?  I don't know about you, Premier Ford, but I have been told informally by people who:

  1. are informally working with older people, driving them around to appointments or to get groceries and doing yard work for them (as a way to get money in their pockets to help feed themselves, albeit putting their elder clients at risk);
  2. opening up informal home cleaning and renovations businesses, operating off their cell phone, to do small jobs for people (because they need food and other necessities because their income  went down and their housing costs are still the same); and 
  3. getting into their old cars and driving for "Speedy", an illegal version of Uber type transportation services and not taking precautions with who they take and protecting themselves and others.

I know many of these people, Premier Ford.  Many were laid off from their usual jobs they had before the pandemic and now they are being told if they applied for CERB, they will lose their ODSP or have an overpayment that might take a year or two to pay off.

Talk to your public health folks, Premier Ford, and ask what the impact of having 10% of the social assistance caseload be forced to get out of their houses to work anyways, pandemic or no pandemic, because they CANNOT AFFORD TO STAY HOME.

Over 130 organizations quickly sent you a letter to tell you not to leave OW and ODSP recipients behind!  They told you to raise social assistance rates so they can purchase their own groceries and not have to rely on food banks.  They told you to allow the small minority of people on OW or ODSP (or their spouses) to get and keep their federal benefits, including EI and CERB, during this pandemic.  These benefits are no less important during this pandemic than other benefits you currently exempt as income from OW and ODSP such as legal settlements, pain and suffering, residential schools, mercury water fund, etc.

A very long list follows of all income exempted under ODSP's directive 5.1:

Income Exemptions

  • Earnings exemptions (See Directive 5.3 Deductions From Employment and Training Income);
  • Earnings of dependent children;
  • Earnings or payments under a training program of recipients, spouses and dependent adults attending secondary school full-time(See Directive 5.3 Deductions From Employment and Training Income);
  • Training allowance and cash reimbursements of child care and transportation for individuals who reside in a prescribed First Nation community and who are participating in an employment training opportunity for up to 12 months. (See Directive 5.3 Deductions From Employment and Training Income);
  • Earnings of persons attending post-secondary school (See Directive 5.18 Exemption of Earnings of Post-Secondary Students);
  • The portion of a payment from the sale of an asset, used to purchase a principal residence, an asset necessary for health and welfare, an exempt asset, or an asset that does not result in the recipient exceeding the prescribed asset limit;
  • Interest earned on liquid assets up to the prescribed asset limits, e.g. $40,000 for a single recipient;
  • An amount up to $10,000 in a 12 month period per member of the benefit unit, in the form of gifts or voluntary payments for any purpose from any source; (this includes monies from trusts, life insurance policies, honorariums and windfalls). Casual gifts of insignificant value, e.g. basic clothing, meals, occasional food purchases are also exempt.
    • Honorariums are generally payments made to individuals to recognize services provided, where payment is not required. For example, a person may volunteer or be asked to participate on a committee and may receive an honorarium. In these cases, honorariums are considered voluntary payments and may be included in the $10,000 exemption for voluntary payments.
    • Honorariums paid in a way that is similar to a salary, to fulfill an obligation to compensate the recipient for services provided, are treated as employment income, and not as voluntary payments under ODSP. In these cases, the usual earnings exemptions apply.
  • Payments from any source in the form of gifts or voluntary payments used for disability-related items and services or for education and training incurred because of the disability of a member of the benefit unit.
  • There is no limit on the value of these contributions, provided they will not be reimbursed from other sources. For this provision to apply it is not required that the intent of the voluntary payment is for the purchase of these types of items/expenses only that is used for these purposes.
  • Gifts or voluntary payments that will be applied to the purchase of a principal residence, an exempt vehicle, or that will be applied to the first and last month’s rent necessary to secure accommodation. (See Directive 5.8 Gifts and Voluntary Payments for more detailed information regarding treatment of gifts.)
  • RDSP related exemptions:
    • gifts or voluntary contributions made to RDSPs by family members and other third parties;
    • interest earned on and re-invested in an RDSP;
    • the federal Canada Disability Savings Grants and Canada Disability Savings Bonds; and
    • all withdrawals from an RDSP for any purpose.
  • Refundable tax credits including the:
    • Canada Child Tax Benefit
    • Canada Child Benefit
    • Ontario Children’s Activity Tax Credit
    • Ontario Trillium Benefit Payment;
  • Ontario Child Benefit (OCB) payments;
  • Payments from the Ontario Child Care Supplement for Working Families (OCCSWF);
  • Payments from the Universal Child Care Benefit (UCCB);
  • Payments from the Canada Pension Plan Orphan Benefit (also known as surviving child benefit;
  • Payments from the Quebec Pension Plan Orphan Pension;
  • Payments made under the Canada Pension Plan Disabled Contributors Child Benefit;
  • Payments made under the Quebec Pension Plan Disabled Person’s Child Benefit;
  • Payments from other jurisdictions that are equivalent to the CPP Orphan Benefit or QPP Orphan Pension or the CPP Disabled Contributors Child benefit or QPP Disabled Person’s Child Benefit.
  • Child support (Effective January 1, 2017). Please see Directive 5.15 Spousal and Child Support for more detailed information;
  • Payments received under subsection 147(14) of the Worker's Compensation Act, known as B165 payments;
  • Payments received for property damage and temporary living expenses through the Ontario Disaster Relief Assistance Program (ODRAP) other than payments for loss of income;
  • Payments (cash and in-kind) received by evacuees of the Kashechewan First Nation between October 2005 and September 2006, from a municipality or a Tribal Council made on behalf of the federal Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development (Canada);
  • Insurance payments made for temporary living expenses and to replace or repair lost/damaged exempt assets or assets within allowable asset limits but not payments for loss of income;
  • Mortgage payments paid by disability insurance purchased by an applicant/recipient on a mortgage for his/her principal residence;
  • A forgivable loan under the First Nation, Intuit, Métis Urban and Rural (FIMUR) Housing home Ownership Assistance Program.
  • A forgivable loan or a grant under the Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program (RRAP) that provides assistance to on-reserve low-income homeowners to bring their homes up to safety and health standards, or improve energy efficiency.
  • A forgivable loan or grant under Ontario Renovates that provides assistance to low-income homeowners to bring their homes up to safety and health standards, improve energy, efficiency and/or increase accessibility of the home through modifications and adaptations; and, create a new affordable rental unit within an existing single family home;
  • Payments made under the Investment in affordable Housing (IAH) - operating components that exceed the maximum shelter allowance up to the actual shelter costs;
  • Payments made under the Community Homelessness Prevention Initiative (CHPI) payments for:
    • rent deposits;
    • establishing a new principal residence;
    • maintaining the health and welfare of a member of the benefit unit in her or her current residence;
    • arrears relating to shelter costs; or other housing and homelessness-related services, items or costs approved by the Director of Ontario Works.
  • Payments made under CHPI for personal needs made to domiciliary hostel residents up to the amount equivalent to the ODSP amount issued for personal needs to recipients residing in a long-term care home.
  • Financial grants, items or services that are issued for energy-conservation in homes through Conservation and Demand Management Programs offered by local Electricity Distribution Companies;
  • Financial grants, items or services that are issued for energy-conservation in homes through Demand Side Management programs offered by local Natural Gas Distributors;
  • Benefits in the form of a cheque or voucher received through the Water Filter Fun. program;
  • All direct financial assistance received from the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport’s Quest for Gold - Ontario Athlete Assistance Program;
  • Funds received from the Ministry of Advanced Education and Skills Development or Canada Student Financial Assistance for education costs such as books, tuition, instructional supplies, transportation costs, child care and compulsory fees;
  • Funds received from the Ministry Advanced Education and Skills Development under the Second Career program for education costs.
  • A bursary received by a full-time student enrolled in a secondary school under 8(1)18 of the Education Act;
  • The Dr. Albert Rose Bursary to assist public housing tenants attending post-secondary school;
  • Payments from an RESP, intended and used for education costs, received by a recipient or any other member of a benefit unit as well as gifts and voluntary payments into an RESP in addition to the $10,000 gift and voluntary payment exemption. See Directive 5.11 Post-Secondary Education;
  • Proceeds from a court judgement or legal settlement or an award from a statutory tribunal (such as compensation resulting from being a victim of an automobile accident, sexual assault or violent crime) received as damages or compensation for pain and suffering, due to injury to or the death of a member of the benefit unit. See Directive 4.6 Compensation Awards;
  • Compensation received as settlement for a claim of abuse sustained at an Indian Residential School, other than compensation for loss of income;
  • Pre-judgement interest awarded as compensation for the delay in receiving damages for pain and suffering as a result of injury to or death of a member of the benefit unit, See Directive 4.6 Compensation Awards;
  • Independent Living Allowance payments from the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board received annually by severely impaired workers;
  • A full income exemption applies to the total amount of a compensation award for the following:
    • awards for pain and suffering as a result of an injury to or the death of a member of the benefit unit;
    • expenses actually or reasonably incurred or to be incurred as a result of injury to or death of a member of the benefit unit;
    • loss of care, guidance and companionship due to an injury to or the death of a family member under the Family Law Act;
    • non-economic loss under section 46 of the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997 or section 42 of the Workers’ Compensation Act.
  • Interest earned on the capital of an inheritance retained in trust up to the allowable limit of $100,000.
In my view, federal benefits are being paid through CRA, not the EI Fund and are considered emergency in nature, much like many other legal settlements and other funds and class actions, etc.  The purpose of this federal benefit is to keep people indoors and not venturing out.  Denying people enough funds to support themselves while "sheltering in place" will only result in many people going out and risking it by working under the table.

I intend to spread this letter wide and far.  I intend to send this to public health officials, because they understand much more than you do that putting low income people into this position will help spread the virus and thus, defeat any attempts of your otherwise strong leadership in trying to flatten the curve.

I also intend to find out after this pandemic is over exactly who got sick and who died.  This might open yet another can of worms about whose lives are valued in Ontario, while others are not so valued.  There was even talk that if it became a choice as to who gets access to ventilators that poor folks and people with disabilities will be likely denied.

Just tell us what you mean, Premier Ford.  If you want us all to stay at home to help flatten the curve, then make sure all of "the people" can afford to do so.

Sunday, October 11, 2015

TOWARDS THE FINISH LINE: THE WORLD SERIES AND THE FEDERAL ELECTION

The Blue Jays just won the right to continue in the American League Division Series with a score of 5:1 against the Rangers at their turf in Arlington, Texas.  There will be another game tomorrow and if the Blue Jays win that one, they will return to the Rogers Centre for the fifth game in the Series, whereupon if they win this, they move to the winner of the other pair in the American League.  I was alive and aware when the Jays won the World Series in both 1992 and 1993, the latter of which I was in Toronto and witnessed the crazy train going on well past twilight and into the wee hours of the morning.  Since 1993, the Blue Jays did not win past regular season.  Hockey has also started its regular season, whereupon tonight, the Montreal Canadians won the Ottawa Senators in the Eastern Conference.  It is such a good thing to be surrounded by Jays fans when we have baseball in October and fans of any Canadian team going into playoffs.  We make our gentleman's bets (or ladies' bets) on who was going to win, with entire cities exchanging jerseys at the time of the playoffs.  This is all part of the community spirit that many of us enjoy.  However, we enjoy this even if our team does not win the grand prize, being respectively the World Series or the Stanley Cup.  The outcome does not impact on our lives in any meaningful way, whereby we get hurt if we lose or benefit over others if we win (unless you are playing for money, which I don't do).

However, the outcome of federal elections can do just this.  While many see elections as a kind of a playoff season, the debates being the games where there are winners and losers.  However, those watching the elections also realize that from the results, there are real winners and real losers and as Canadians, we need to try to make these elections work for everyone, not just for those that stand to gain the most from a party intent on giving you back even more money that you don't need, somehow convincing the public you will still be spending it in your community despite the fact you already have everything you need/  For the purpose of this post, I want to explain to people what is on offer in general for the federal election and what this means for people in Canada, and especially underlining why it is important to cast your vote even if you don't know who to vote for.

First, the unfortunate focus of the federal parties has been on tax credits.  Tax credits are fine if you have a strong annual income with money left over at the end of every month.  If you use some of this money to pay for your children's participation in sports, you will be able to claim a children's fitness credit, or if you pay upfront for home renovations, you might qualify for a small renovations credit. Tax credits are offered everywhere by the Conservatives, thrown about like candy mostly to their supporters, but at the same time putting on a charade when attempting to address regular Canadians. Unfortunately, many regular Canadians might actually believe that the Conservatives will be handing you a cheque if you fall into an increasing number of categories, while the fact remains that if you are only earning a modest income, you likely cannot pay the upfront costs for children's hockey, home renovations, carpentry tools, etc., so any tax you have to pay will be at its maximum as the Conservatives will not be offering you any cheques or tax reductions just for you being alive.  At the same time, if you are a single earner in an upper middle class family earning at least $93,000 a year on your own, while your spouse stays at home with the kids, you can haul up to $50,000 of your own money (on paper) to your non-earning spouse to save on your taxes for a reduction of almost $2,000. This doesn't assist single earners that earn much less than that.

Further, because the Conservatives do not believe anybody needs child care and that all families have somebody who is able and willing to stay at home for many years to look after their own children, usually the woman (so her income can be further cut back and even demolished upon the 50% chance of your marriage ending in a divorce, but oh well...), they do not support funding daycare for any child.  At the same time, Conservatives reprimand single parents who are stuck on welfare and unable to work because they have no child care.  Their solution is, I suppose, is to find yourself a man who earns a family wage to take care of you.  Good luck.  About the intact families where one earns money from a job and the other is at home because of disability, the losses are borne entirely by the one working as well as the person who is disabled.  This convoluted gift for the wealthy has no benefit whatsoever for caregivers (unless they were able to quit their jobs and look after their loved ones full time, with a tax credit - wow).  If you are a single earner and earn less than $44,000 a year, you won't be getting any help from the Liberals either, as their magically constituted middle class earner earns between about $44,700 and $89,401.  I can't remember the last time I earned more than even $40,000 for my family, so I guess I am stuck with all the taxes, the clawbacks and other punishments I am to tolerate for being married to a man who is disabled.  

The Conservatives have extended the Universal Child Credit Benefit (UCCB) to those adults with children between the ages of seven and eighteen, which is fine, but it is just $60.00, albeit the benefit IS taxable.  Many of Trudeau's middle class families will be losing most of it through taxes at the end of the year.  I presume the Conservatives' intent for this money is for parents to put it into an RESP or something for their children.  Most lower middle and working class families I know do not have the money to put into an RESP.  The money from the UCCB, while appreciated, will likely go towards paying the hydro bill, or paying to put food on the table.  It is impossible to save when you have no money from which to draw from to put into any kind of savings instrument.  At the same time, people are constantly bombarded with talk about how Conservative policies will put "more money in your pocket".  I am saying, this would not put any more money in anybody's pocket who needs it ... and for those that do benefit, they are unlikely to spend it in their communities.  Like the large companies that have already benefited from Liberal and Conservative largesse for years, this money is likely to be hoarded in savings accounts or even in offshore accounts.  How that helps our economy, I am puzzled.  It certainly isn't going to go towards hiring even one additional worker.

The Liberals have a few selective benefits, such as an expanded child benefit that will be targeted to lower and middle class families and add up to more money per child on an annual basis.  They will also tax earnings from those earning $200,000 or more in a new tax bracket at 33%.  Corporate tax rates will remain the same (even though as some pointed out, many wealthy people flow all of their income into a privately held company and draw in accordance to the corporate rate as opposed to their general taxation rate).  That means many millionaires will continue to pay less taxes than the rest of us.  The NDP wants to close a number of loopholes for high earners and hike corporate taxes. Conservatives, of course, want to scare everybody into believing that all the large companies will leave Canada to lower tax havens.  This is not what will move them.  The Trans Pacific Partnership deal likely will eventually move Canadian jobs out of the country, but not a single Conservative or even a Liberal will admit that.  When confronted, the Conservatives promise to pour billions into the dairy, auto and other sensitive industries to help "transition" them under the TPP; little do they admit that not a single penny will land into the pockets of the workers in these industries, just the overpaid and over entitled executives.  Once the TPP takes effect and jobs are lost, those losing their jobs will join the rest of us to compete for the remaining low paid, part-time, unstable jobs that are left, while struggling to make ends meet on less and less money.

The NDP also wants to fund a national childcare scheme, as well as begin talks about home care and a national pharmacare program, although I think the TPP would put a kibosh to that one.  Harper will continue to constrain Canada for years to come, even long after he had been booted out of office, which is better sooner than later.  A national childcare scheme, while a good idea, might only be good a few years down the road after all the provinces and the federal government adopt it, which leaves people needing child care today still lacking.  What I do like about the NDP is that they will stop the income splitting for the families (not the seniors) and will end the extension to $10,000 for the TFSA. An extended TFSA again only benefits wealthy people or at least those that have $10,000 laying around doing nothing that they can plug into one of these accounts.  Most of us just hope to get through each month not falling further into debt.  Who is willing to speak to us about that?

The NDP is the only major party that plans to fully ratify and implement the International Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.  Canada has signed the agreement, but did nothing beyond that, such as setting up an infrastructure so that legislation, programs and services passed by any Canadian government, federal or provincial, pass Charter muster.  This would give us a chance to challenge how disability benefit programs serve to keep people with disabilities in poverty and discourage relationship formation and children staying at home beyond the age of eighteen years.  It might even find a way to allow us to file in tort to get our hard earned retirement savings back, especially among us who were forced to drain them and look forward to retiring under the nearest bridge.  The amount the government provides for basic OAS/GIS is sub-poverty level and given the fact that most health coverage disappears at that stage.  Only the NDP and the Liberals want to increase the GIS and bring retirement age to 65 for those that wish to retire at that time.  The Conservatives are probably fooling a lot of seniors into believing they will be receiving an additional $2,000 annually if they are widowed or otherwise living alone.  This again is a tax credit, which means if you are receiving any GIS (Guaranteed Income Supplement) as part of your retirement package, you will get nothing.  Again, the better off you are in retirement, the better off the Conservatives want to make you.  To Hell with the growing number of seniors who are retiring in deep poverty.

In this election, don't let the federal Conservatives tell you health care, services for people with disabilities, etc. is only provincial.  If this were true, then what would happen if one of our provinces suddenly decides to opt out of medicare?  If health care were provincial, they'd be able to do that with no strings attached, which is what many Conservatives like to see given they have done nothing during their tenure about enforcing the Canada Health Act (which regulates the delivery and public funding of health care, as well as federal transfers).  The Conservatives plan to slowly reduce the amount of money they transfer to the provinces, despite the ageing population and increased needs, to the extent some say is as much as $36 billion.  If you think you can pay more and more for your needed health care out of pocket, then that is okay for you ... but for the rest of us?  Too bad.  The provinces don't want to raise taxes any more than the feds do, so why does the feds always say health care is provincial?  For exactly that reason!  They want to download health care entirely onto the provinces by withdrawing their funding and not enforcing the Canada Health Act.  Further, the Conservatives have not held a single meeting with provincial premiers on health care since they got into power, so that is because they intend to get rid of it by attrition.

They say services to people with disabilities are provincial.  Canada used to have a Canada Assistance Plan, which regulated welfare payments, which ensured that no province will make deep cuts to the program that would put people's health at risk, that they had a right to retain assets, that they had a right to earn money that would not be deducted, and the right to appeal, among other key requirements, again with penalties for provinces that don't comply.  In 1993, the federal Liberals scrapped the Canada Health Act, which essentially opened the door to many provinces cutting welfare rates, passing workfare requirements, etc.  This is why we are so far behind in Ontario.  A recent article stated that if welfare was retained even at the rate of inflation since Mike Harris came to power, it would be over $962 per person, but it is actually less than $650 per month (in Ontario).  Disability rates were frozen under Harris, which is the same as a cut because the price of housing, food, transportation, clothing and other necessary items goes up, while your income stays the same.  The Conservatives also deepened the regulations which continue to sit today that smother people from ever escaping poverty, unless they immediately find a good paying job with benefits.  We all know where these kinds of jobs had gone.  If you have one, be thankful.  Many of us will never get there.

They also downgraded environmental, food inspection and health regulations, whereby industry is allowed to hire their own "inspectors" and pass on their own discretion.  We all know how well that went with incidents such as Maple Leaf Foods and the listeria crisis and provincially, Walkerton. The Conservatives say it is incompetent staff, but who is setting the standards as to who should be working in these places?  Nobody.  It continues today.  You are a friend of a friend of somebody. That is how you get jobs in most places.

The unfortunate thing is that some people still believe there are "opportunities" out there.  If there were, we would not be in the economic crisis we are in.  People would not be working two or three part-time jobs or trying to survive on one low income, or moving in with parents or friends and relatives because they cannot afford to pay for a roof over their heads.  I would have been able to snag a position between 2000 and 2006 when I sent no less than 800 applications to various jobs for which I qualify, but was denied every single time.  An Adzuna study last year deemed the Niagara Region as having only one job vacancy for every one hundred unemployed job seekers.  The people telling us about these "opportunities" unfortunately already had theirs and most are enjoying at least a semblance of a retirement, something that is becoming more and more at question for most people.

Elections are important.  It is too easy not to vote.  However, political parties and campaigns determine their platforms and priorities by the people that vote, not the people that don't vote.  The political campaigns know each and every poll in every electoral district.  They obtain data from various sources, where they know the age breakdown, ethnic breakdown, average incomes, renter/ owner ratio, etc. for each and every poll.  If it turns out and it does, that those in wealthier homeowner-based neighbourhoods, vote at an average of 85% of their registered voters ... while only twenty percent of registered voters in renter dominant, lower income and high youth polls, it should not surprise you why political candidates say nothing about poverty, housing, tuition fees, etc. because they know who votes and who doesn't.  I do believe if the lower income neighbourhoods, the young people, students, etc. voted at the same percentage as the wealthier and middle class groups, politicians will be falling all over each other to get the "poverty vote", the "housing vote", the "student vote", etc.  Don't believe me?

Ask yourself why Harper has tried to make it harder for many people to exercise their right to vote.  Be a rebel and vote anyways!  Surprise them all!