WEALTHY MARRIED AND FINANCIAL ADVISORS GASLIGHT ON ‘PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY

(These thoughts are purely the blunt, no nonsense personal opinions of the author about financial fairness and discrimination and are not intended to provide personal or financial advice – financialfairnessforsingles.ca).


Many espouse ‘personal responsibility’ but base it on gaslighting and entitlement (personal-responsibility).

Andrew Allentuck article “Couple with a big age gap forced to contemplate impact of early death” (couple-with-big-age-gap-worry-that-their-prosperity-is-fragile) states couple, aged 64 and 55, with grown children have financial assets of $1,741,500 including $650,000 house, TFSAs, RRSPs, non registered, GICs and cash.  At husband’s age 65 couple’s estimated income is $72,000 net income after eligible income splits, tax free TFSA distributions and reduced income tax to average 15 per cent. They spend $17,000 annually on travel and entertainment. Singles with similar income, should they be so lucky, could pay 25 per cent in taxes. This financial profile receives five out of five stars.

 If husband dies early, financial advisor estimates Lori could lose $17,008 gross annual income and potentially pay higher taxes.  Reduced income could result from 1) loss of husband’s OAS, 2) part his two work pensions, 3) most of his CPP benefits and 4) inability to split income, but 5) still have $650,000 house.  Most of these are not available to never married singles throughout entire senior lives. The advisor gaslights by over embellishing potential losses of surviving spouse which are far less than gains achieved as a couple.

How wealthy married abdicate their ‘personal responsibility’:  1) retire at age 55 with no acknowledgment that they haven’t fully contributed to EI/CPP even though they have used maternity/paternity EI benefits but possibly will receive extra 25 per cent survivor CPP benefits because Trudeau has sent out a trial balloon re this intent  2) complain that most of husband’s CPP benefits would be lost, but they haven’t contributed fully to CPP 3) spend $17,000 annually on travel and entertainment 4) calculations based on age 90 and 100 when 2018 average life expectancy is 82.8 years.

Lori could take ‘personal responsibility’ by working till age 65, reducing excessive spending and saving that money to be used if husband dies early.  How about paying fair share of taxes and Lori maintaining frugal standard of living that many singles never married have to live every day of their lives?

Even Ayn Rand betrayed her ‘personal responsibility’ philosophy by using social benefits in her elder years.

Gaslighting of ‘personal responsibility’ smacks of individualism and entitlement instead of betterment of society as a whole.

(This blog is of a general nature about financial discrimination of individuals/singles.  It is not intended to provide personal or financial advice).