Human Capital - Age

[Pitlord]

Does anyone feel that human capital - age point allocation is not fair?
If you are 20-29 you get 110 points and if you are 33 YO you get 88 points.
I really don't see why would 4 years make 22 points difference.
Only reasonable factor that I can think of is that 29yo will stay employed longer and contribute to Government budget but that can only be expected 30-40 years from now. Who knows what would the world be like then.
On the other hand, short term, maybe that 29yo is a fat racist bully who is not necessarily better candidate which will contribute less to the Canadian society.
You can look at this topic from different angles but at the end I believe that 22 points difference for 4 years of age are way to much at the rates of current draws and all the changes that are going to occur. Somehow, even if you score good in ielts and have a Canadian degree, some inexperienced kid can run you over just because is younger.

 

[kryt0n]

Does anyone feel that human capital - age point allocation is not fair?
If you are 20-29 you get 110 points and if you are 33 YO you get 88 points.
I really don't see why would 4 years make 22 points difference.
Only reasonable factor that I can think of is that 29yo will stay employed longer and contribute to Government budget but that can only be expected 30-40 years from now. Who knows what would the world be like then.
On the other hand, short term, maybe that 29yo is a fat racist bully who is not necessarily better candidate which will contribute less to the Canadian society.
You can look at this topic from different angles but at the end I believe that 22 points difference for 4 years of age are way to much at the rates of current draws and all the changes that are going to occur. Somehow, even if you score good in ielts and have a Canadian degree, some inexperienced kid can run you over just because is younger.

I agree that I didn't notice much difference after turning 30. It doesn't seem fair however they are trying to imply that the older you are, the less time you will be working and paying taxes before retiring. I'm not sure it should drop each year (maybe full points for 18-30 then 10 points less 31-35 etc) but that's the reason.

 

[Pitlord]

If that is the only reason then the person who approved this program had not made a wise decision.
Nobody can guarantee that just because you are a bit younger you are going to stay employed longer. Even if this is true some older candidates can start their own businesses create jobs and pay more tax.
I don't want to say that older candidates are better but there is a smell of discrimination on this one

 

[kryt0n]

If that is the only reason then the person who approved this program had not made a wise decision.
Nobody can guarantee that just because you are a bit younger you are going to stay employed longer. Even if this is true some older candidates can start their own businesses create jobs and pay more tax.
I don't want to say that older candidates are better but there is a smell of discrimination on this one

I agree with you 100% but that is their justification.

 

[mukulabd]

Australian immigration program is better in that respect. They give full points for 25-32 years and after that they deduct points based on age range, like 33-40, 41-50, etc. So you don't have to keep losing 5 precious points every year. But well, we are all planning for Canada..

 

[Pitlord]

I understand it if the cut off varies 100 crs points up and down from draw to draw but at this rate it's devastating. I think that I am going to write another email to both PM and Minister.

 

[kensplanet]

It's definitely related to taxes and money. A 20-29 should be able to pay more taxes compared to others. I know exceptions are possible. Immigration rules work for some and doesn't work for others. Best to play with your own cards.