At least it is honest...
Seeing how the aging population is hitting so many countries at the same time, this is going to affect long term furture investment income by slaughtering disposible income.
I just went looking back at a post I did looking at projections of workers to retired, http://makingsenseofmyworld.blogspot.ca/2008/05/aging-population-canada-vs-us.html. I really wish that I had citations of where I found my data as I'd like to go back and see where it is now.
For Canada they've started to address the problem by increasing the age by two years to age 67 to qualify for Old Age Security, but I don't think that's going to be enough, and my goodness, I just turned 50 and it does affect me some in that the age starts to increase for anyone under age 54 right now. Personally, I think they should make everyone have to take a means test to qualify to get it. I completely disagree with just giving money to people just because of age that you've never paid into that comes out of general revenues. There is a claw back, but I think the income to have it all clawed back is around $110k or something like that, and it doesn't start to claw back until $68k of income. How fair is it that family struggling is being forced through taxation to transfer income to people who are better off?
There isn't a single social program/benefit out there that hasn't been cut just as I qualify for what used to be. It happened with student loans/grants, programs to help buy a home, tax breaks, consequently, I have little faith or belief that the way it "is" now will be anything like what it will be like when I get to retirement age. I completely disagree with slaughtering the programs to help young people get a start in life, the use of goverment as a transfer of wealth from those with the least to those with the most.