It’s arguably one of the driest subjects in Canada, but left unchecked it could have a catastrophic impact on your wallet.

Too bad the provincial government isn’t planning for it.

We’re talking about the nation’s aging population. It doesn’t take a PHD student or Nobel-prize winning economist to see that as our nation’s percentage of retired people increases, while the percentage of working-aged people decreases, a momentous impact could be had on our society.

It’s well known that governments tend to collect more in taxes from people who are working than those who are retired. A person working and making $50,000 per year pays far more in income taxes and sales taxes than a retired person with an annual income of, say, $25,000. Thus, our governments will face a significant cash crunch as waves of people retire.

At the same time, governments are going to face a big bill as older people tend to require more expensive health care services like hip replacements and 24-hour nursing home care. Younger people tend to require less expensive services like an annual check-up or a cast for a broken bone.

To be clear, this column is not a slight at older Canadians. They worked for decades and paid a fortune to the government in taxes. The problem is our politicians misspent the money and didn’t put aside any savings for when the baby boomers aged. But not only is there no savings, all three levels of government have racked up over $1 trillion in debt.

The federal government has been studying how demographic shifts will impact government bodies in Canada for quite some time. Their findings are released each year in their “Fiscal Sustainability Report.”

The 2014 report estimates that while the federal government is in decent shape, provincial and municipal governments in Canada will face an annual shortfall in revenues of approximately $34 billion in the years ahead. To put that into perspective, the GST brought in $31 billion this year. Clearly, we’re talking about municipal and provincial governments having to raise taxes significantly if they don’t get wasteful and non-essential spending under control.

We asked the Selinger government what analysis they’ve done on the matter and discovered there wasn’t much of anything. In short, the government is aware of the problem, but only calculates budgetary numbers five years out. There doesn’t appear to be any long-term planning and don’t bother asking if they’ve put aside savings to address these challenges. Our province’s debt is currently racing towards $32 billion.

If these demographic challenges sound far off in the future, they’re not. The first of the baby boom generation (born 1946-1965) hit 65 years old in 2011 and every day more and more people retire and start to require more costly health services.

So how will the system cope? Will the health care system be there when you need it? Will enough young people stay in Manitoba to foot the bill for these challenges or will people continue to flee to provinces that are in better financial shape?

Don’t ask the Selinger government, they don’t have a clue.