Moving in with BF

[solarya]

I am on ODSP , my bf is not. We are moving in together this summer. He
is retired, I amjust wondering how this will work? does anyone know?
He has stocks/bonds, gets a pension and mostly just takes money out of
his account. Will I get cut off?

[Deborah Smith]

Hi, I too would like to know the answers to these questions about wanting to move in with a partner. Is there anyone out there who knows what would happen under these circumstances? If you are cut off are you cut off of your cpp as well? Can a person on odsp get married to someone who is not? and still be able to collect odsp? Any information would be most helpfull, thanks

Debbily,,,Go In Peace
 

> Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2012 23:48:21 -0800
> Subject: [odspfireside: 42562 ] Moving in with BF
> From: tbr...@rogers.com
> To: odspfi...@googlegroups.com

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ODSP Fireside" group.
> To change email delivery, nickname or unsubscribe from this group visit: http://groups.google.ca/group/odspfireside/subscribe?hl=en
> To post to this group via email, send email to odspfi...@googlegroups.com

[jbkeh]

In the blink of an eye. He will be expected to dip into his money to
support you.

On Jan 4, 2:48 am, solarya <tbra...@rogers.com> wrote:
> I am on ODSP , my bf is not. We are moving in together this summer. ... Will I get cut off?

[justice4odsp]

This one, I'm sure, should be challenged through human rights.

I say this because ODSP is for people who have already been officially
declared disabled. That means our rights to freely chose who we live
with, are protected by the Ontario Human Rights Code and the Charter.

To develop a rationale, I would say, if 2 people are working for minimum
wage decide to live together so they can share cost economies, are in
love, or simply enjoy each others company, they are free to do it. The
wages for both will stay the same because the government would never get
away with taking away their money because they chose to live together.

The same thing goes for someone on a Federal or private disability pension.

Ontario does NOT HAVE A right to claw back money from a Boyfriend,
spouse, child, or anyone else we chose to live with.

I know that, at times, the ameliorated clause has been used by Ontario,
but if you read the Charter, the ameliorated clause can only be used if
it has been set to IMPROVE the quality of life for a protected group. I
also know the Charter now has something that changes the rules for
social assistance recipients, but I say bunk. To set a policy like that
for the disabled, is breaking the law - international law - if nothing
else. Clawing back income from whomever else is living with us is a
hurtful policy, not a helpful one.

Angela, has this ever been challenged formally? If so, can you cite the
case for me? I would like to look it up, read it thoroughly, and add it
to my stack of stuff to take to the UN.

If it hasn't been challenged, who's willing to do it? To start a case
you have to be the one who is personally affected, and I'm not. However,
I'm sure game to back whoever launches the case, in every possible way
that I can. I'm not a lawyer, but I'm gutsy and I'm a knock dead
researcher. With teamwork, I'm sure we could do it AND WIN!!!

Who's game to try?

justice4odsp

[abrowne]

Solarya,

Your benefit unit will be set into a benefit unit of two, as opposed

to one.  His retirement income/pension is deducted dollar for dollar,

as well as any income he provides from his savings, provided that

his savings/investments/RRSPs whatever exceed $7,500.  If this

is the case, you will probably be cut off and he expected to support

you entirely, similar to how many spouses have to cope ... 

If this doesn't bother either of you, then it isn't a problem, but in my

experience, this is why 86% of ODSP recipients are single.

Angela

---

From: solarya <tbr...@rogers.com>
To: ODSP Fireside <odspfi...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2012 2:48:21 AM

Subject: [odspfireside: 42562 ] Moving in with BF

[abrowne]

Justice,

There are a lot of issues with respect to challenging this.  If I thought it could go

straight human rights, it would be a slam dunk.  I am still mulling about the best

strategy for myself, as this has financially ruined my family and my own 

possibility of retirement - ever.  I not only want this to change, but I want the 

money I lost paid back to me, so that I can at least get myself out of debt and

build the business to a position where in fact I might be able to retire - even at 80.

It definitely is a human rights issue, if not a Charter issue, but I would try to seek

which tool to use.  Human rights might take the position that it treats spouses,

common law or legal, the same way.  But I am sensing there might be some

leverage (on the part of the one who challenges this situation) with the exemption

of an adult dependent or spouse going to school, their income being exempt (we

don't get the $100 work allowance for them, but their income is exempt).  

Henceforth, if a child of eighteen who is qualified in their own right for ODSP

is eligible to receive it, can continue to receive it and live with their parents

regardless of their income, there can also be a challenge from that end too.

The trouble with some of the government's justification for all this is that 

spouses have an obligation under family law to support one another, but in

my case (and very much more so in the case of the boyfriend), I am forced

to exceed family law obligations - not just meet them.  The boyfriend has no

obligations under law to support the poster that started this thread.  The key

disturber for me is that ODSP is not deemed a contributory benefit (and 

therefore deemed payable if one has contributed and then makes an

eligible claim).  

Even as a married person, to meet my responsibilities under the Family Law

Act, I am to earn my money, contribute to the household - period.  My

husband receives his, contributes to the household what he can - period. It

kicks in if the marriage breaks down, where there might be some entitlement

for support and if there are children and what their ages, situations are.

Your point about the two minimum wage workers is also a good one; even

if these two decided to get married and become husband and wife (or married

as same sex partners), nothing happens to their wages either.

There are a number of cases that touched on economic rights concerning

social benefits, including the Gosselin case (where the majority wrote against

the plaintiff claiming age discrimination in welfare benefits at the time in Quebec);

Law (where the court rejected another claim of age discrimination in survivors benefits

denied to a young widow of a CPP contributor), Falkiner, et al (where the divisional

court ruled against the government in a "spouse in the house" rule for four 

women in receipt of what used to be called Family Benefits); and an off the wall

ruling called Iness v Caroline Cooperative Homes (in which a Board of Inquiry

under the Human Rights Code in Ontario ruled against a housing cooperative

that set subsidies differently in accordance to one's source of income - e.g. charging

the full shelter allowance for social assistance recipients, while only 30% of other

eligible residents)..  In many of these rulings, it is not necessarily the actual

decision made, but the reasons and in Gosselin, the minority decision where

legal interpretation of rights can be argued. There was a case as well, Henderschott,

that was ruled in favour of the mother, who lived with her parents and for some

reason was getting less money from social assistance than she would if she

lived alone as a single parent.

These are just a rough sampling of my knowledge of involved case law.  We

need to strike it at the right angle to show that not only is it discriminatory, but

it impacts on the dignity of the affected group (a lovely criteria brought by Law).

If anybody wants to bandy these things around and are into doing a bit of 

research into this, I can start a subgroup of people that just want to work

on this, and we can communicate privately on this matter.  I know it affects

11% of families on ODSP.  While many are double disabled and neither

are working or going to school, but it kicks in when one does.

Once we get this going, we can present this to a lawyer that might want to

take this on, or failing this, I can guide the litigation process the best I can,

but because I would also intend to be a party, I can't represent anybody, esp

if we want to try to hear these cases together, like they did in the special

diet cases.

Write me privately and you will join justice and I in figuring this out?

Angela

---

From: justice4odsp <justic...@gmail.com>
To: odspfi...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2012 10:39:56 PM
Subject: Re: [odspfireside: 42583 ] Moving in with BF

This one, I'm sure, should be challenged through human rights.

I say this because ODSP is for people who have already been officially declared disabled. That means our rights to freely chose who we live with, are protected by the Ontario Human Rights Code and the Charter.

To develop a rationale, I would say, if 2 people are working for minimum wage decide to live together so they can share cost economies, are in love, or simply enjoy each others company, they are free to do it. The wages for both will stay the same because the government would never get away with taking away their money because they chose to live together.

The same thing goes for someone on a Federal or private disability pension.

... Angela, has this ever been challenged formally? If so, can you cite the case for me? I would like to look it up, read it thoroughly, and add it to my stack of stuff to take to the UN.

[benjer weigl]

Well as a Single Benefit unit .To me under the ontario human rights code  It also discriminates against me in marital status a single male. and causes a  Link(as i am a person on ODSP) and a impact of emotinal hardship. How can I ask someone who is not disabled to be in a relationship with me. If they are punished by being in that relationship by being forced into following rules by Ontario Works which is a separate enity. 

---

[jbkeh]

But when all is said and done, does it not boil down to what the
taxpaying public will accept? Are they ready for millionaires having
spouses drawing Income Support?

[Geek]

-------Original Message-------

From: justice4odsp Date: 05/01/2012 2:29:42 AM To: odspfi...@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [odspfireside: 42583 ] Moving in with BF

Ontario does NOT HAVE A right to claw back money from a Boyfriend, spouse, child, or anyone else we chose to live with.

------------------------------------------------------------------     i disagree. odsp is a resource of last resort and it makes sense to expect a person's partner to help support them.   cg

[abrowne]

Ben,

My husband was not always disabled.  When we married, both of us were

working and then I later went school.

 

If he was on ODSP when I met him, yes I have to be truthful that I probably

not enter into a relationship with him.

 

Not because he is not a nice guy and a kind person (which he is), but because

I can't afford to enter into a relationship of this type.  If I was making a very

significant income with full benefits, it might matter less.

 

Angela

[abrowne]

JBKEH,

It already happens.  Millionaires are married to people on CPP, long

term disability, EI, WSIB, you name it!  Things get affected at tax

time and that should even it out.

 

But I really doubt if this rule was changed that there will be a

stampede of millionnaires looking to marry people on ODSP.

 

By my chance of ever getting out of poverty is affected by this

rule and it has to go.  I don't care what "taxpayers" think.  Maybe

I might want to become one of them and pay more by earning

more?

 

Angela

-- 

[Paul]

At 09:58 AM 1/5/2012, you wrote:
>But when all is said and done, does it not boil down to what the
>taxpaying public will accept? Are they ready for millionaires having
>spouses drawing Income Support?

There should be a cut off amount. Just like tax brackets. If you
make for instance $60,000...I would expect you would have more
disposable income.

Shunning them from day one is like discrimination.

[abrowne]

Geek,

So it is okay for people on EI, WSIB, LTD, OAS, and other benefits

not to lose money by getting married, but okay for people with

disabilities on ODSP to do so ,.,.. hell, be damned.  Did the person's

spouse CAUSE that person's disability?  Until you have been in

those shoes, you have no right to assume what's fair ...

 

People can escape poverty by getting married, or moving in common

law relationships with somebody else.  But people on ODSP can't?

 

The family law act does not require a spouse to pay the other's living

expenses and half their salary or income!

Angela

[abrowne]

Paul,

There is no cut off point for spouses of those on CPP, EI, LTD, OAS, etc.

A disability is a disability is a disability is a disability.

 

If the spouse with the disability cannot work and contribute the household,

why should they be penalized for being unable to do so?

 

The tax system would take care of differences, such as the rare instance

where somebody becomes a millionnaire and they're married to someone

on an ODSP pension.

 

Angela

From: Paul <paul...@gmail.com>
To: odspfi...@googlegroups.com

[Paul]

unfortunately I see the gov. thinks that anyone of social assistance
of any kind are through (as in food) feeders.

I think it's the same as when you buy Canadian or from your small mom
and pop store, you make the area better than buying from Walmart.

If you don't get you don't spend, and the cycle never ends.

The only way out of ODSP is to win the jackpot, but I'm not going to
waste $ I live on to see $204 a year as a tax for something you have
1 in 14 mil of winning....

It's the stupidest game people play and it's all on high hopes.

There isn't anything in ODSP to stimulate the so called economy
within ODSP recipients.

If the gov would give tax breaks on ODSP recips. like stopping cuts
because of living with someone or 50% off your income, the gov is
just shooting them selves in the foot.

It's almost as if the gov. gives you $ and tells you to be quiet....

no wonder this world is the way it is.... the world lacks love and
the reason... You get dinged for even attempting to make yourself a
better person by sharing it.

Everyone has hopes and dreams. I would love to be with someone I
have known for 15 years, but I care enough not to hurt her financially.

I guess the best you can be, being on ODSP is to have close
friendships and make the best of them with your heart.

[abrowne]

No Paul,
If the government stops punishing relationships, there will be
more money put into the system. When there are two incomes
in a household instead of a very low see saw income despite
80 hours of work in a week, there is much more money being
spent in the economy, and lower health bills ... if I was able to just work an
eight hour day instead of fifteen, I would not need 9 different
pills a day and various stress-related medical care,.
Angela

________________________________
From: Paul <paul...@gmail.com>
To: odspfi...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Thursday, January 5, 2012 1:57:07 PM
Subject: Re: [odspfireside: 42613 ] Re: Moving in with BF

If the gov would give tax breaks on ODSP recips. like stopping cuts because of living with someone or 50% off your income, the gov is just shooting them selves in the foot.

It's almost as if the gov. gives you $ and tells you to be quiet....
>

[Paul]

At 01:43 PM 1/5/2012, you wrote:
>Paul,
>There is no cut off point for spouses of those on CPP, EI, LTD, OAS, etc.
>A disability is a disability is a disability is a disability.
>
>If the spouse with the disability cannot work and contribute the household,
>why should they be penalized for being unable to do so?
>
>The tax system would take care of differences, such as the rare instance
>where somebody becomes a millionnaire and they're married to someone
>on an ODSP pension.
>

I know what you are saying in return

What mean is that when you have more disposable income, people
shouldn't be cut by the throat at the first thought of living with someone.

In other words, like the tax brackets.... if you get $100,000 at
year as the non-disabled person, you can afford to help out, but not
if you make $25,000 a year.

If you make more, it's less stress on both of the partners.

Same as in if you have millionaires hardly paying taxes because of
loop-hole in the system.

But yes, a disability is a disability.

It should be based on the other spouses income, not just because you
are them him or her (with the financially aspect not even brought
into the eqation).

[Paul]

At 02:06 PM 1/5/2012, you wrote:
>No Paul,
>If the government stops punishing relationships, there will be
>more money put into the system. When there are two incomes
>in a household instead of a very low see saw income despite
>80 hours of work in a week, there is much more money being
>spent in the economy, and lower health bills ... if I was able to
>just work an
>eight hour day instead of fifteen, I would not need 9 different
>pills a day and various stress-related medical care,.

Sorry Angela. That IS what I meant to express.

I have trouble sometimes putting thought into words with my seizure meds.

If you don't have $, you don't have $ to put back into the economy.

My wording about the gov. is that they think we just take the money
and gamble, and those other wasteful things. But that's not to dispute.

I've worked on ODSP since I have been on it and yes, you can't get
ahead in life.

Give' ODSP recips less and it will cost more in the long run any ways
for taxpayers with OHIP.

[abrowne]

Paul,

I am saying let the tax system handle it, just it handles other

couples that are not involved in ODSP.  I spoke to a colleague

of mine that earns $100,000 a year.  His wife is on CPP.  At

the end of the year, the tax system sorts it out for them, as he

is a well paid earner and she has a somewhat taxable income.

 

ODSP needs to be changed to a form of a pension with an

incentive to work for the individual on it, but no penalty if

they do not work, plus annual cost of living increases.  It can

be made into a taxable income, although I doubt most recipients

would be stuck paying too many taxes on it, but it would resolve

the spousal thing with the odd millionnaire of the bunch ;-)

 

If my husband was on CPP instead of ODSP, I would have

a substantially successful business, as I would not be bound

by stupid ODSP rules and can hire who I need and can

choose to work more or less on my own choice, as opposed

to having to handle ALL the administrative, marketing, phone,

invoicing, accounting, and so forth ... which has burnt me out

seriously to the point that before the holidays I was almost

admitted to the hospital again for chest pains.

 

Instead I work 15 hours a day and together receive less than

$30K for the household.  I will also no longer be able to retire, as

the retirement vehicle is not available to me.  So, how is that fair

to me?

Angela

From: Paul <paul...@gmail.com>
To: odspfi...@googlegroups.com

Sent: Thursday, January 5, 2012 2:08:15 PM
Subject: Re: [odspfireside: 42618 ] Re: Moving in with BF
 

[Paul]

At 02:17 PM 1/5/2012, you wrote:
>Paul,
>I am saying let the tax system handle it, just it handles other
>couples that are not involved in ODSP. I spoke to a colleague
>of mine that earns $100,000 a year. His wife is on CPP. At
>the end of the year, the tax system sorts it out for them, as he
>is a well paid earner and she has a somewhat taxable income.
>

I understand exactly your reply.

My friend is on WSIB and living with someone.

No ODSP type of claw backs with him.

My posts may have seemed kind of stupid, but what you wrote is quite
understood and goes along the same thoughts as what I wanted to say.

It's almost as if ODSP rules help to fund their own ODSP system.

But at a higher percentage rate, as if we were taxed at the rate of
millionaires over.

[justice4odsp]

Okay, Geek,

I too am a geek. I've also been disabled for life, lack marketable skills and work experience, and would give my eye teeth to work. If I move in with someone, they will lose too much income. If 2 working people live together, however, they are not required to subject themselves with too much of an income loss to stay healthy, pay the rent, and hopefully survive without undue pain and suffering.

If ODSP is meant to be an income of last resort and my disability is enough that people won't hire me, I'll ask you now, will you hire me?

I can do tons of things with computers.

My point is, I see this as a comment that is completely uncalled for. Just because things work for you, doesn't mean they will work for everyone else. You know nothing about us.

Care to think about this, and then write back with an full explanation about why you said something that sounds suspiciously like an attack?

Perhaps adding an explanation of why you have that opinion would help. If you have tips to help us not use this LAST Resort that you seem to want to endorse, I am all ears.

Please enlighten us. Thank you.

[Geek]

i have no idea what you are rambling on about .....my comment speaks for itself. it's not right to compare us to working ppl as the amount of their income does not depend on things such as how many children they have, what their shelter cost is, and their eligibility to have their income does not depend on their financial need.   we are being supported by the taxpayers, essentially for doing nothing......no it is not our fault we are disabled but we still get money for doing nothing. i am just telling it like it is.   cg

[justice4odsp]

This is funny. We can dream, can't we? Everyone is at least entitled to do that.

I have to make a sarcastic comment because I have problems focusing and accepting gloomy outlooks.

I truly believe that if we could all stop being so defeatest and decide instead, to NOT give up before we start, we might, just might have a chance of changing somethings.

I look at this the same way I look at fixing a broken object, say a printer. If the thing is broken and refuses to work, I've got two choices... throw it out immediately and then do without until I can save up enough money to buy a new one, or take a stab at trying to fix it.

What's the worst that's going to happen by trying?

Well, for me, the printer has given me 3 extra years of life so far. I figured, I might be able to figure it out if I look at it carefully and give it a try, so I did.

Guess what? The fix was really simple and the printer works beautifully.

The same thing goes for our attitude here. We can say nothing or keep saying oh this is bad, this is bad, and give up. I guarantee that by doing this, it will be bad.

If we try a different approach... speak up, write letters, and don't give up, we might start on the road to change. Then again, we might not.  If we get change, even if it's a mere piquing of an interest that doesn't really fix much, but we at least have the interest, then we've won the first round. The next time, we can take motivation from that and try a louder round 2, and then 3 and 4 and so on.

Please folks, don't give up. We need to collectively speak out together ... from the heart... no policy. That's Angela's job (and that of a few others that work in policy). Our job is to illustrate why we cost the health care and the social services system so much money, and then ask for their help to fix it. Pictures, proof, and the question - could you keep healthy and make yourself into a good candidate for work if you were living like this?  Play the heart strings with facts, pictures, and emotionally moving things.

justice4odsp

[abrowne]

Geek,

It costs a fortune everytime an ODSP couple breaks up.  40% of regular marriages

end in a divorce or split up (60% if they're common law), and 95% of those involved

in ODSP end in divorce or split up.  What happens is the working partner loses

income to the point where they cannot afford to continue in the relationship and

they leave the person on ODSP, and then quite often the working partner ends up

either on ODSP themselves or on Ontario Works because of the financial problems.

And guess who gets stuck paying TWO BENEFIT UNITS instead of one?

 

If the partner continues to work, ODSP SUES that partner for 50% of their income,

so they can't escape poverty by leaving that relationship either.

 

I am in a position to see what happens.  About once a month I get somebody on

ODSP on appeal, and then their next call to me is a referral for a legal separation.

People with disabilities get condemned to poverty for having a disability and being

unable to work.  True equality under the Charter of Rights means equal treatment

before and under the law.  Not just equal treatment for those not on ODSP.

 

And if it bothers you that this will be challenged, too bad.

 

Because YOU will never find ANYBODY who will want to engage in a relationship

with you because it will COST them too much money, esp today when the middle

class is going down the toilet.  I am sorry that I have to be this blunt but I am not

sure you are making these comments with any sense of sincerity and compassion.

Further, I know you've been on this list before.

 

Angela

From: Geek <christm...@gmail.com>
To: odspfi...@googlegroups.com

Sent: Thursday, January 5, 2012 3:43:47 PM
Subject: Re: [odspfireside: 42627 ] Moving in with BF

[Heather M.c.]

 "Ontario does NOT HAVE A right to claw back money from a Boyfriend,

spouse, child, or anyone else we chose to live with."

 

Well......

ODSP claws back (from my cheque) half of what my 20 year old son

makes because he lives with me.

 

So I'm not sure if what you wrote is an ODSP law(?)  I don't know about, or it's just your opinion?

 

Take care

 

Heather.

From: Geek <christm...@gmail.com>
To: odspfi...@googlegroups.com

Sent: Thursday, January 5, 2012 12:50:06 PM
Subject: Re: [odspfireside: 42603 ] Moving in with BF

-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ODSP Fireside" group.To change email delivery, nickname or unsubscribe from this group visit: http://groups.google.ca/group/odspfireside/subscribe?hl=enTo post to this group via email, send email to odspfi...@googlegroups.com

[abrowne]

In addition to this, I also have innumerable cases where ODSP recipients

get cut off because their partners will NOT provide information to ODSP

about their earnings and assets.  Further, there are many, many people

who get into relationships, lose the only income they have and their

partner is abusive to them and they have no way out ...

 

At least 50% of so called fraud investigations have to do with partners; if

the workers didn't have to keep poking their noses into the business of

other people who don't want ODSP to poke their noses into their lives,

then the workers have more time and resources to spend on the actual

recipients and perhaps, give them a bit more help once in awhile.

Angela

[justice4odsp]

I guess you don't remember the days when people who were declared disabled were recognized as such, and then given enough income to survive on and stay healthy. I hate to say it, but we have a right to not live in dumpy houses, to look after our health, and to not suffer the health implications of what the government is forcing us into.

I've said this before but maybe you weren't on this board back then.

• In 1993, the year Bob Rae froze the rates, a single person with a disability got a maximum of $930 per month in income.
• If you use the Bank of Canada inflation calculator, you will see that that amount would translate into $1,302.86 in today's dollars.
• In 2011, a single person on ODSP gets $1,064 per month.  That means we lost $238.86 in buying power per month.

I don't know about you, but that $238.86 would buy me a lot of healthy food. It might even buy me a membership in a place where I can go to get exercise or maybe even pay for some physiotherapy; something I can't get because the government delisted it, and the rules are too narrow to not cover the needs caused by ... a disability.  They were only thinking of short-term health issues, when they set up the rules for receiving this service.

If you consider it is acceptable that we no longer have enough money to survive on and stay healthy, then I guess I can't say anything more. It's a free world and everyone is entitled to their opinion. I just don't have to agree with it.

I also refuse to accept that we deserve this because the taxpayer is paying our way. I am far from lazy and I desperately want to work... I love working. It gives me something positive to do, keeps me physically and emotionally healthy, and it instills hope.  

I want a job and I can't get one. I would also love to live with someone who will actually do it but won't because, they too, believe in keeping enough money to properly look after themselves. 

If you were to read this report about, what amount of income has been determined is needed for a Living Wage in Kingston http://www.policyalternatives.ca/sites/default/files/uploads/publications/Ontario%20Office/2011/10/Kingston%20Living%20Wage.pdf, you would see that an income of considerably more is recommended for one to live a healthy lifestyle

I don't necessarily agree with these numbers - the frills because in my eyes this income is golden, but it will help to illustrate that we don't need to accept the low ODSP allowance and lie down and die. This Living Wage group is still very active and they truly believe that all those who are paid wages by the municipality deserve to earn this much, and that the city should only buy goods and services from businesses that will pay their employees this much. It's a great idea for those who are not disabled, and can work in one of those higher paying jobs.

Poverty affects way more than just the people who worked to produce this Poverty Roundtable report. As committee members, their needs are met so why does it make sense that they're lobbying for better wages for those who can work?

They're doing it because they know they must keep asking for enough income to fight their way out of, what they perceive is poverty, and what I perceive is gold.

We must do the same, so I won't accept your argument that we must sit back and accept our lot in life. If they weren't they wouldn't be sitting on the committee.  members whoyou will see the huge discrepancy in interpretation of what people believe is the amount of income they must earn to survive.

If a person is earning less than the $16.29 per hour named here and earning minimum wage without benefits, I highly doubt they would be foolish enough to move in with someone on ODSP and guarantee they will lose enough money to effectively starve.

All I can say is you're entitled to your opinion. If I could work, believe me, I would work.  I would do it so I could do the 'right' thing - buy healthy food, and take proper steps to look after myself. I don't need the frills. I lost those years ago and I'm used to doing without them.

I can't say anything more.

justice4odsp

[Geek]

fyi i have had proposals while on odsp ..... it doesn't stop anyone who truly loves you.....you can challenge it all  you want but i doubt you will win   cg   -------Original Message-------

From: abrowne Date: 05/01/2012 5:24:11 PM To: odspfi...@googlegroups.com

Subject: Re: [odspfireside: 42633 ] Moving in with BF

[Geek]

heather, i did not write that about odsp.....i was quoting the post i was replying to.   cg    -------Original Message-------

[Geek]

i do not know what this has to do with my comment about people being expected to support their live-in partners.   cg       -------Original Message-------

From: justice4odsp Date: 05/01/2012 6:10:28 PM To: odspfi...@googlegroups.com

[Bill Higgs]

Another point, I own my home (not sure for how much longer tho)  I have a tenant to help cover the shortfall in what ODSP gives for shelter. and it gives him affordable housing to boot

For every dollar I am paid in rent 60 cents is deducted from my cheque. I get to keep 40 cents and I am expected to do reapirs maintenance etc to this property and can not claim these expenses against this said income, like any othewr landlord can.

 

You would say "then increase his rent".  Ok, lets raise his rent 10 bucks, yep 6 bucks more is deducted off my cheque.

In other words his expenses goes up 10, I get 4 and ODSP gets 6.

 

Yep great deal for ODSP!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

This place needs a new roof to the tune of about 6000 bucks.  I will be stuck with payments on the 6000 ( I cant pay the bills now) Can I deduct the payments off this so called income??????  Not according to ODSP!!

 

Bill

 

----- Original Message -----

From: justice4odsp

To: odspfi...@googlegroups.com

Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2012 5:39 PM

Subject: Re: [odspfireside: 42638 ] Moving in with BF

[abrowne]

And the disabled person is not expected to also contribute to the relationship?

---

From: Geek <christm...@gmail.com>
To: odspfi...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Thursday, January 5, 2012 8:57:03 PM
Subject: Re: [odspfireside: 42642 ] Moving in with BF

[abrowne]

Geek,

You will never have anybody want to live with you or marry you.  I know this.

84% of the "cases" of ODSP are single individuals.  4-5% are single parents.

Only 11% are couples, about half or less of which are double disabled.  

If they are married to a non-disabled person, I found the reason was because

the person met them BEFORE they were on ODSP.  Given my 20 -25 years

involved in advocacy, I only know of ONE case where a non-disabled person

married/lived with somebody already on ODSP, knowing what to expect.  This

was when ODSP was known as Family Benefits.  In virtually every other case,

the couple separated and/or divorced.

There are still a few double disabled couples I know, but they also lose out

as well., but most minimize their losses by neither one working at all.

So, it is almost a statistical certainty that single people like yourself will die

alone on ODSP.  

And I don't give a flying fig what about what you think of my opinions of this,

because it is clear to me you are on this list just to cause trouble.  I haven't seen

an informative or supportive post of yours yet.

A

---

From: Geek <christm...@gmail.com>
To: odspfi...@googlegroups.com

Sent: Thursday, January 5, 2012 8:39:53 PM
Subject: Re: [odspfireside: 42640 ] Moving in with BF