Read the following article from a website.
A group of small-business owners in Winnipeg has started a petition asking Ottawa to let workers leave the Canada Pension Plan and invest their contributions on their own. The petition has collected about six thousand names since March, and it will be presented to a federal committee on retirement savings in November. Supporters say the choice should belong to each worker. Critics say a plan that everyone pays into is the only reason it can promise steady payments for life.
Rosalind Chalmers, who owns a print shop with fourteen employees and helped organize the petition, says the employer share hits small firms hardest. “Every time I give someone a raise, my own contribution goes up too,” she said. “Last year that money would have paid for a part-time apprentice. If my staff could choose, I think many of them would save on their own, and I could hire again.” Chalmers adds that younger workers do not trust the plan, which she calls “a promise made by people who will not be around to keep it.”
Pension actuary Leopold Dorval sees a serious risk in letting people leave. “The plan works because young, healthy earners pay in for decades alongside everyone else,” Dorval explained. “If they walk away, the fund loses its steadiest members. Then the people who stay would face either smaller cheques or bigger contributions.” He also notes that private savings can fall sharply just before someone retires. “Nobody gets to choose the year the market drops,” he said.
Thandiwe Danjuma, who runs an anti-poverty group in the city’s North End, says the petition ignores a bigger problem. “A cleaner who worked forty years on low wages still retires on a small cheque, because payments follow what you earned,” she said. “Opting out would do nothing for her. She never had spare money to invest.” Danjuma wants Ottawa to raise the income supplement for low-income seniors instead. Corwin Delacroix, an electrician in his twenties who signed the petition, admits he is still unsure. “I like the idea of controlling my own money,” Delacroix said. “But I watched my grandfather depend on that cheque every month, so I would want a way back in if my own savings failed.”
Using the drop-down menu (▾), choose the best option according to the information given on the website.
At present, Rosalind Chalmers feels 2..
This article shows that 3..
Leopold Dorval warns that young earners walking away would lead to 4..
Paragraph four mainly adds 5..
The following is a comment by a visitor to the website page. Complete the comment by choosing the best option to fill in each blank.
AI explanationShows the answer. Tap to open.
Correct Answer: a call to let workers leave a national pension plan
Why this is correct: The article begins with a petition asking Ottawa to let workers leave the Canada Pension Plan. Every person quoted then reacts to that idea.
Passage Reference: a petition asking Ottawa to let workers leave the Canada Pension Plan and invest their contributions on their own
Tips: Ask of every option whether Chalmers, Dorval, Danjuma and Delacroix each touch on it. The answer is the subject the whole article is built on, not a small fact inside it.
Why the other options are wrong:
- a plan to increase payments for older people: Danjuma suggests more help for seniors, but only as her answer to the petition. It is not what the whole article is about.
- a dispute over wages at a small print shop: Chalmers owns a print shop, but nobody argues about wages there.
- a study of what young adults buy each month: No study of spending is described. Young workers come up only as people who might leave the plan.
Correct Answer: unable to afford another worker
Passage Reference: Last year that money would have paid for a part-time apprentice. ... If my staff could choose, I think many of them would save on their own, and I could hire again.
Why this is correct: Chalmers says her contribution money would have paid for a part-time apprentice. She adds that she could hire again if her staff could choose, so right now she cannot.
Tips: Read every sentence Chalmers says, and the lines the reporter adds about her. Pick the answer that is true for her today.
Why the other options are wrong:
- ready to open a second print shop: Chalmers never talks about a new shop. She says she cannot even pay for an apprentice.
- pleased with what the plan costs her: Chalmers says the employer share hits small firms hardest. She is not pleased with the cost.
- sure that her staff trust the plan: Chalmers says younger workers do not trust the plan.
Correct Answer: an opt-out might help some people but hurt others
Passage Reference: Supporters say the choice should belong to each worker. ... Critics say a plan that everyone pays into is the only reason it can promise steady payments for life
Why this is correct: Chalmers thinks an opt-out would let her hire again. Dorval warns that those who stay would get smaller cheques or pay more. Danjuma says it would do nothing for low earners.
Tips: Decide what the article as a whole shows, beyond the topic itself. Then test each answer against several speakers, not one.
Why the other options are wrong:
- most workers already invest their own savings: Nobody says this. Danjuma points out that many low earners never had spare money to invest.
- Ottawa has agreed to change the payment rules: The petition has not even reached the committee yet. It will be presented in November.
- young workers trust the system more than owners do: Chalmers says younger workers do not trust the plan. The article never says they trust it more.
Correct Answer: worse terms for the members who stay
Passage Reference: Then the people who stay would face either smaller cheques or bigger contributions.
Why this is correct: Dorval says that if young earners walk away, the people who stay would face smaller cheques or bigger contributions. Either way, those members get a worse deal.
Tips: Read Dorval’s quotes one by one. Choose the result he describes, not the cause in the item line.
Why the other options are wrong:
- a stronger fund with fewer members: Dorval says the fund would lose its steadiest members. That makes it weaker, not stronger.
- a bigger cheque for every member: Dorval warns of smaller cheques, not bigger ones.
- lower costs for small employers: Lower costs for small firms are what Chalmers hopes for. Dorval does not talk about employers.
Correct Answer: a wider problem and one signer’s doubts
Passage Reference: says the petition ignores a bigger problem ... admits he is still unsure
Why this is correct: In paragraph four, Danjuma says the petition ignores a bigger problem. Delacroix, who signed the petition, admits he is still unsure.
Tips: Read “Paragraph four” again in full. Then ask of each choice: does “Paragraph four” really do this, or does another part of the article?
Why the other options are wrong:
- the costs that employers must pay: The employer share is Chalmers’s complaint in paragraph two.
- the risk of members walking away: Dorval explains this risk in paragraph three, not paragraph four.
- the date the petition goes to Ottawa: November, the month the petition goes to the committee, is given in paragraph one.
Correct Answer: six thousand
Passage Reference: The petition has collected about six thousand names since March
Why this is correct: The article says the petition has collected about six thousand names since March.
Tips: The commenter is talking about people who signed. Find the number linked to the names on the petition.
Why the other options are wrong:
- six hundred: The article gives a much bigger number of names than this.
- sixteen thousand: This is more than the article reports.
- sixty thousand: This is ten times the number in the article.
Correct Answer: a promise made by people who will not be around to keep it
Passage Reference: which she calls “a promise made by people who will not be around to keep it.”
Why this is correct: Chalmers says younger workers do not trust the plan. Chalmers calls it “a promise made by people who will not be around to keep it.”
Tips: The commenter quotes the shop owner word for word. Find the phrase Chalmers herself uses as a name for the plan.
Why the other options are wrong:
- a bill that young workers pay for people much older: Chalmers is unhappy with the plan, but she never calls it a bill paid for older people.
- a deal that mostly helps people who are close to retirement: Chalmers never says the plan mostly helps people near retirement.
- a savings plan whose cheques young workers will not see: Chalmers talks about trust, but she never uses these words.
Correct Answer: the year the market drops
Passage Reference: Nobody gets to choose the year the market drops
Why this is correct: Dorval warns that private savings can fall just before someone retires. Nobody gets to choose the year the market drops, Dorval adds.
Tips: Find the actuary’s warning about private savings and what nobody controls.
Why the other options are wrong:
- the day their health fails: Dorval does not talk about health in the article.
- the year their company closes: Dorval does not mention companies closing.
- the age their parents need care: Caring for parents is never part of Dorval’s point.
Correct Answer: a cleaner
Passage Reference: A cleaner who worked forty years on low wages still retires on a small cheque
Why this is correct: Danjuma gives the example of a cleaner who worked forty years on low wages. The commenter’s mother is in the same situation.
Tips: The commenter names a job. Find the one job that a speaker in the article uses as an example.
Why the other options are wrong:
- a bus driver: Bus drivers are not mentioned in the article.
- a cashier: Cashiers are not mentioned in the article.
- a cook: Cooks are not mentioned in the article. Danjuma names a different low-wage job.
Correct Answer: income supplement
Passage Reference: Danjuma wants Ottawa to raise the income supplement for low-income seniors instead.
Why this is correct: Danjuma wants Ottawa to raise the income supplement for low-income seniors instead of allowing an opt-out.
Tips: The commenter hopes the committee looks at another kind of help first. Find which one Danjuma names.
Why the other options are wrong:
- housing benefit: Housing help is never mentioned in the article.
- disability benefit: Disability benefits are never mentioned in the article.
- heating rebate: Heating costs are never mentioned in the article.
The rest of this explanation is for members. Sign in free to read why the other options are wrong, key words and tips.
Sign in to read the full explanation