Income Adequacy Among Canadian Seniors: Helping Singles Most
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canadians have heard a great deal of discussion in the national media about expanding the Canada Pension Plan (CPP), driven by concerns that many will retire without having made proper arrangements to adequately replace their incomes with pensions and savings. But the proposed remedies have been targeted at the retirement-income shortfalls potentially faced by relatively comfortable middle-class and well-off retirees. A far more pressing concern is the disproportionate vulnerability of one particular group: Single retirees living alone. The estimated poverty rate among seniors in Canada is among the lowest in the industrialized world according to the OECD. But elderly singles living alone face significantly higher rates of income inadequacy than their peers. Elderly singles are overwhelmingly female, and they are twice as likely to be below Statistics Canada’s Low Income Cut-Off threshold than the general population, and four times as likely to be below the threshold as the elderly population as a whole. But the CPP policy ideas currently being batted around are unlikely to offer much help to this especially vulnerable group. Because females comprise roughly 70 per cent of elderly singles, and because of historically lower labour-force participation rates among females, a substantial portion of single elderly are entitled to few or no CPP benefits of their own (let alone other pensions), beyond the considerably reduced survivor CPP benefits collected by those who have been widowed. Survivor benefits, however, would not be available to the growing number of senior divorcees. Meanwhile, women tend to have longer life expectancies than men do, typically stretching retirement resources beyond what would otherwise be required for males. There are two relatively straightforward policy changes that could directly target benefits to help the single elderly living alone who are below the low income cut-off (LICO threshold). One is to modify the Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS) top up strictly for elderly people living alone. Another would be to simply expand the CPP survivor benefit from 60 per cent of the deceased spouse’s entitlement to 100 per cent. These policies are not without cost, of course. But the cost is not prohibitive. If the federal government were to allot $1.35 billion to these kinds of targeted policies, it could slash the number of single seniors living below the low income cut-off by half. With another $87 million, it could reduce the number by two-thirds. These amount, respectively, to just a 3.5 per cent and 5.8 per cent increase over current annual federal spending on elderly benefits. With Canadian policy-makers willing to spend resources and efforts on strengthening CPP benefits for relatively comfortable Canadians, it seems only appropriate that policies aimed at helping our most vulnerable seniors avoid poverty should come first.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".