Thursday, December 11, 2008

Is this even legal?

Can the government do this? They didn't actually pass the change in regulation, and yet they're telling people to follow it? As I am young and stupid, I don't have retirement savings, so I'm not sure how this all works. Anyone else know if this is actually kosher?

6 comments:

Ian said...

It may be "legal" (I'm not sure)... but it doesn't feel like we have a government that's acting legitimately or transparently now.

sassy said...

That's a really good question Adam. I don't know the answer and although, I do think that seniors need a break in light of the economc situation, it would seem that the cons are 1) buying support with unilateral measures, and 2)making it up as they go along.

ADHR said...

The thing I think I find most bothersome is that some sort of measure like this probably could have enjoyed broad support in the HoC. I mean, seriously, who wants to be the party beating up on seniors and others drawing pensions? But, once more, Harper takes the secretive backroom option rather than the transparent and honest one.

burpnrun said...

Before you all get bent out of shape and start frothing at the mouth, read the second comment on this post by one of your own:

http://accidentaldeliberations.blogspot.com/2008/12/on-lawlessness.html

Really, folks, life is too short to get worked up over absolute nits.

ADHR said...

(1) I don't troll the comments sections of other people's blogs. I know this is probably shocking to you.

(2) I still don't see the justification. What I see is the government instructing the CRA to allow people to break the law. It may be common, but there's something disreputable about Harper's refusal to face the HoC on this (and every) issue.

ADHR said...

Oh, lord, you think SDA is good readin'. FYI, I'll be bouncing further comments until you start making sense.