Archives for May 16, 2019
Long Term Care Insurance
Last time, we looked at Critical Illness insurance designed specifically to cover children and childhood illnesses. Today we’ll look at another not well known insurance, Long Term Care Insurance, LTC.
What is long term care insurance? It’s a type of insurance designed to address the health, social, and personal care needs of individuals who have lost the ability to care for themselves. There is a certain degree of public support available, but government programs are not comprehensive and long term care services can be very costly.
The level of health care and professional assistance we need, together with the associated costs, will increase with age. The average Canadian will experience 9 – 14 years of the final years of their life with diminished health, according to Statistics Canada, 2012.
Long term care insurance helps to pay for the care services that other plans don’t provide and bridge the gap between what is covered by provincial health care, and the services you may want to access. LTC insurance helps to cover the costs of care, meaning you have more choices around the kind of care and the amount of care you’ll receive. Your retirement savings and investments can be preserved. LTC will prevent you from dipping into your retirement income to cover your health care costs.
How does long term care insurance work? LTC provides an income-style, tax free, benefit when the insured person becomes unable to care for themselves due to aging, an accident, illness or deteriorated mental ability. It offers peace of mind knowing that the financial burden of care won’t rest entirely with your loved ones.
Who can be covered? People between the age of 21 and 80, who are approved through an underwriting process, which assesses your likelihood of becoming dependent on someone else for care.
How do you qualify for the benefit? If you are unable to perform 2 of the 6 activities of daily living which include, bathing, dressing, toileting, transferring, continence and feeding, or you need constant supervision by another person because of deteriorated mental ability, you would be eligible to receive your monthly benefit amount. There is a waiting period that needs to be met; the length of which is chosen by the insured at the time the insurance in put in place. Benefit periods can vary from 100 weeks to lifetime coverage. This is something that is determined at time of purchase along with the amount of coverage to put in place.
Optional enhancements. As with most insurance policies there are options that can be added to enhance your coverage. A few of these are:
- Inflation protection: while on claim, your benefit would increase annually
- Return of premium on death: A returnable amount would be paid back to your beneficiary or estate upon your death (only available for issue age to 65)
- First payment bonus: When a new claim is first paid, a bonus of 12 times your weekly amount is paid
- Waiver of premium: Once a claim is approved you no longer need to pay the premiums
Nearly 75% of Canadians say their personal finances would be impacted if they were to develop a chronic health condition and 50% of Canadians say they are worried about the cost of health care when they retire. Speak to your Certified Financial Planner about adding a Long Term Care Insurance policy to your plan, offering you peace of mind and protecting your savings.
This column is written by Michelle Weisheit CFP, IG Wealth Management and presents general information only and is not a solicitation to buy or sell any investments. Please contact your own advisor for specific advice about your situation.
I believe that Mr. Steele has over-simplified the ‘No National Park’ movement.
The main issue is a total distrust of Parks Canada and the federal Government. This distrust has been earned by Parks Canada in the methods employed to attain their goal. To quote Dick Canning; “the residents have a right to be engaged and decide what type of park they might want”.
What I have been hearing is that type of park should not be any model that will include the federal government or its Parks Canada as they have worked to isolate and not listen. An example being the wording of the survey forms in trying to limit input that was counter to what Parks Canada wanted to hear.
Parks Canada has an obligation to include First Nations at the local level but they did not feel they had an obligation to include regional and municipal governments or the MLA who represent sthe residents of the areas that this park would be carved out of.
I myself and the director from Area A put this forward at the information meeting Tuesday and were told that Parks Canada felt telling the RDOS board what they were doing was enough. Really!
You don’t think you should involve the elected representatives. The equivalent would be telling the provincial cabinet we will be making all the beaches in Penticton and Osoyoos part of the national park but never talking to the town councils or the residents. Is that what you call engagement?
Fred is right people do not like change. It is quickly brushed aside that other models have been put forward such as the LRMP and or Provincial Park status which are met with howls of despair from the elitists that only the national park model will work yet Parks Canada puts forward proposed attendance numbers ranging from 300,000 to the current 2000 to 4000 per year; whatever number satisfies the political dictate of the day. That type of waffling adds to the distrust.
Parks Canada has told us that they want to form the park first and then they can start the agreement talks.
Once again REALLY? That is like buying the car and then trying to negotiate what options should be included after you have paid for it.
Whether or not Parks Canada can do a good job or not is a discussion for another format. The necessary information and articles are in abundance and easy to obtain, it is up to the individual to become informed
What is the question? is to make sure that what is done is the right decision and best fits this area and its residents but most importantly in my opinion whatever is done must be flexible as the world is changing rapidly and what is proper today may be problematic tomorrow.
edited for clarity
Two large tankers operating in hostile waters can be a para-less journey.. in this case a metaphoric journey into the undecided. It is time to revisit where we are on the Canada Parks issue.
First let me be clear, I am not on either side in the battle. I have no preference. I am offering some outside observations from what I have heard and seen. I also have a bit of an outline as to who may or may not be winning the day.
A while back I cautioned the no side to broaden their view. Putting up a sign or carrying a sign that just says NO is not helpful. The reason is it allows the Yes side to define a group thought into a single identity with a negative overtone, it allows the yes side to generalize “They are all the same” the meaning “They are negative obstructionists”
I have read the list of interests at the table trying to either point out problems or seek clarification and some resolve. On Wednesday I noted there are those saying, it could take up to two years to decide. That sounds to me like a statement to calm the waters. It is likely more rhetoric than fact.
There are any number of valid issues to be discussed and resolved, water, range land, recreation, soil conservation, and the list goes on. The odd issue out here is the idea it will bring more tourists. I asked a group of reasonable friends what they interpreted that to mean. Answered varied.
1 these people want a small closed community
2 this community is suspicious of strangers
3 it is a community that does not want change,
Those were the three main responses. If these assumptions are true there are impediments to having these dreams come true.
Here is some insight on why that might not be the case:
1 Wanting a small closed community with a major highway running through it makes a closed community in the 21st century nearly impossible.
2 Suspicion of strangers or outsiders is not really a viable argument either. The yes side can rightfully claim the opposite by pointing the fact this community elected an outsider to the position of mayor. In fact the new mayor barely hung up the curtains on his front window when he took the oath of office.
3 Not wanting change in this world isn’t going to fly either. Time marches on and change happens, the idea is to see it is positive change.
There are many recognized groups working to define the ground rules to determine whether or not they can support the venture. Because they are involved in the dialog does not mean they are for or against, It means they are garnering facts in which to base a decision on.
Those who just say NO limit their ability to communicate their concerns. They cut off access to the decision makers and they are defined as obstructive with little to offer except the word NO.
It should also be pointed out a referendum might not serve the interests of the NO side. If this park is to be on crown land, then the referendum could very likely see the citizens of BC voting. Where people in the South Okanagan might well vote NO the vast majority would likely vote YES. In addition even more tourists would flock to the area.
Based on what I see the NO side is being more and more isolated from the process. They have more visibility but less influence. Be rest assured the decision will not be a local one, therefore to be successful the entire direction needs to change.
To have any hope at all NO has to opt in to the discussion, not just hold up signs saying NO
Two large metaphoric tankers are on a collision course, both filled with statistics, views, and placards saying NO, but then this whole idea has been debated for some time without resolution.
Sept 14, 1934 – May 9, 2019,
Departed for his final sojourn, at 84, peacefully and without struggle.
Predeceased by his father Jozsef, his mother Teresa, his brother Lazlo, his nephew Laci (all in Hungary), father-in-law Ross Miller and mother-in-law, Ada Miller (both of Oliver ).
Survived by his loving wife Donna-Faye, daughters Ramona (Thomas), Dana (Derek), and Tara (Kylie) all of Vancouver. Grandchildren Luke, Hannah and Sam.
After making the tough decision to leave Hungary during the 1956 Revolution, Jim first came to Canada in 1957 as part of the Sopron Forestry Placement at the University of British Columbia. Initially finding work in the forestry and fishing camps in Powell River and on Haida Gwaii, he made his way to the Okanagan to pick fruit in ‘58, falling in love with the climate, vista and people — in particular Donna-Faye in 1961.
Between working in the Okanagan orchards in the summer and winter jobs in Vancouver, Jim took a course in commercial art through the Southern Alberta Institute of Technology. He picked up a job in the packing house and made his permanent residence in Oliver. He spent many years supplementing his income by painting signs throughout the Okanagan and if you look closely, you will still find the odd sign in Oliver created by Jim.
With ambition and work ethic, Jim climbed his way up the ranks in the packinghouse, ultimately retiring as the General Manager in 1994. He was instrumental in leading the packinghouse and BC Tree Fruits through many changes and modernizations. Jim proudly represented the packinghouse and Canada travelling to many US cities and to countries such as China and Thailand, building relationships with customers, sharing knowledge of the fruit and best handling practices.
During his life, Jim also served on several boards, including the Okanagan Savings Credit Union, the Oliver Arts Council and the Okanagan Valley Tree Fruit Authority. He spent many years with the local Rotary Club, and he donated artwork to various organizations for fundraisers and volunteered at SOSS with the art department.
His main hobby was creating art. In a perfect world, it would have been his career. Starting with wood inlay, he proceeded to oils, pastels, watercolours, charcoal, acrylics, ink line drawings, and eventually computer graphics. Notably, he produced a calendar every year depicting local scenery and wildlife. Jim also enjoyed growing his own herb garden, was passionate about his cactus cultivation, and cooking with peppers and paprika. He loved to BBQ, enjoyed jazz music, and debating big and small with family and friends.
In his later years, Jim was content to putter in his garden, enjoy afternoon drives through the valley with Donna-Faye and entertaining his family on the deck.
Egészségedre! (Cheers! In Hungarian.)
Celebration of life will take place at 10:00 am, Saturday June 8, 2019 at the Oliver Community Centre.
Condolences and tributes may be directed to the family by visiting www.nunes-pottinger.com
Yesterday I posted a picture of a tree. A harmless picture of something that caught my attention as startling – almost artistic.
I asked the owners and thought sincerely they said no problem. I would never enter someone’s property without their expressed permission.
I guess I got it wrong and was confused.
I remember about five years ago taking a picture in Rockcliffe of a boulevard near a stop sign that was really unkempt. Boy did I hear about that.
You never know who will react to an item with their own slant on what they see or read.
With the taking down of the tree picture all the comments are gone. Sorry – some of them quite interesting.
So…… to the owners I apologize but sincerely I thought I had permission.