Will the Age Pension increase by $30 from January 2017?

Who will receive more in Age Pension from January 2017?

Australian money enclosed in a pension jar

Maree has heard that pensioners will receive an extra $30 per fortnight once the asset threshold changes take effect, but is this really the case?

Q. Maree
Can you please publish the amount that the Age Pension will increase by in January 2017, for a person that has no house of their own, no assets and no money in the bank? Approximately 18 months ago Scott Morrison announced a $30 increase would happen in January.

A. Unfortunately, the rate of Age Pension will not be increasing in January 2017. The $30 increase referred to by Scott Morrison will be as a result of the changes to the asset thresholds. Those who will receive up to $30 more in their Age Pension payments are those currently on a part Age Pension, who will benefit by moving to full Age Pension or lose less of their payment due to the increase in the lower threshold. 

If you are currently on a full Age Pension, this payment will continue as is until the next indexation in March.

RELATED ARTICLES





    COMMENTS

    To make a comment, please register or login
    Cranky
    1st Nov 2016
    10:21am
    I was reading the news paper this morning and it appears that Australian aged pensioners are the worst treated in the world, even Englands pension rate is 2.5% higher than Australia and Italy is better off by12.5%, so don't you think that Australia being one of the richer countries in the world can afford to treat their aged pensioners better. Also, it is time that all politicians are brought in to line with the rest of society. When you really look at it what have politicians done, except fill their own pockets, to get what they are given after a few years in politics. It is time that all aged pensioners get unionized and take on the Governments and receive a fair go - Max Jackwitz
    Fredklaus
    1st Nov 2016
    10:23am
    Like
    johninmelb
    1st Nov 2016
    10:41am
    It's time aged pensioners did a lot of things.

    BUT sitting on our backsides writing messages to a website that no politician reads, will achieve absolutely nothing.

    When you are ready to start some real action to change things, let us know.
    Old Geezer
    1st Nov 2016
    11:12am
    OAP do very nicely in this country. You only have to see the number of them in clubs and on cruise ships.
    Retired Knowall
    1st Nov 2016
    11:38am
    The real answer is to make sure after 45 + years of working life you don't have to rely on the OAP.
    Sconny
    1st Nov 2016
    11:44am
    old geezer you might be lucky enough to go on cruises and enter clubs but I friggin cant not on what I get from age pension. When I came here 46 years ago this was a generous and considerate country. Now its got bloody mean
    Rodent
    1st Nov 2016
    12:13pm
    Hey OG sounds like a lot of Self Funded Retirees,in the Clubs and cruises to me
    Old Geezer
    1st Nov 2016
    1:10pm
    No rarely go to clubs or on cruises myself but all you have to do is watch the tellie to see what is really happening. Pictures are worth a thousand words.
    Old Man
    1st Nov 2016
    5:40pm
    Old Geezer, you are full of it. You tell us that OAP's are taking cruises and, when challenged, use as your proof that it can be seen on the tellie. I have never seen any old age pensioners on "the tellie" although I have seen a lot of retired people. This is not proof.
    Old Geezer
    1st Nov 2016
    6:15pm
    Gee Old Man you need to sharpen up your people watching skills as I can pick them out very easily.

    Just like I can guess a lot of the answers to a certain quiz show just by listening and watching how a certain presenter ask the questions. I was sitting with my family watching this show one day and amazed them with my knowledge. Truth was I didn't really know the answers to about half the questions. Someone even remarked that it's hard to get anything past the Old Geezer.
    Triss
    1st Nov 2016
    10:22pm
    I'll stand by your side, Cranky. How is it that the Age Pension is called welfare but not the pensions of ex teachers, ex centrelink employees, politicians, etc?
    According to The Australian the budget outcome for 2015-16 shows a sum of $314bn would be required to cover public sector superannuation liabilities at the government bond rate of 2.7 per cent, up from $248bn a year ago.
    It seems that because of a dodgy policy that made the age pension a welfare payout every government since has used it as a piggy bank to pay off everyone elses debt.
    Rae
    2nd Nov 2016
    3:03pm
    I cruised back from NY on the last leg of a world cruise a couple of years ago.

    From talking to other passengers at least 2/3rds were receiving some part pension and using it to fund cruises.

    This was a world cruise and many had paid the $30 000 needed for the full 104 days.

    Most were frequent cruisers and saved to do so.

    I don't find it a problem if people live frugally and do this but it is a fact that this happens.

    I have a few friends on the OAP and they live quite nicely being able to pay all bills, eat well and holiday now and then.

    Even buy a new car every decade or so.
    Triss
    2nd Nov 2016
    8:46pm
    But at least they are paying with money they've saved from their pension, Rae, what are your thoughts on ex politicians who go on holiday many times a year paid for by the taxpayer on top of their huge pensions?
    Anonymous
    2nd Nov 2016
    10:15pm
    Anyone else noting the inconsistencies in OG's claims? On the one hand, he/she claims to live on so little the taxman wonders how he/she exists, and to have minimal needs and a simple lifestyle. On the other, he/she frequents casinos and takes cruises, apparently, as he/she identifies pensioners there? I think he/she should have been a politician in the current government. Meets all the criteria. Arrogant, selfish, misleading, using whatever false argument seems currently convenient to justify the unjustifiable!

    And OG, pensioners who go on cruises are either on secure government or superannuation pensions or are reducing their assets because of a STUPID assets test change. You need a dose of reality. But then, you wouldn't recognize reality if it bit you.
    Rae
    3rd Nov 2016
    12:30pm
    Triss I believe politicians are too highly favoured and need to cut back as they have cut back other self funded retirement benefits supposedly because we can't afford them. This of course is nonsense in a fiat currency country suffering a certain amount of deflation.
    They think we are stupid. There was absolutely no need to attack non concessional amounts in super for example. It has opened a can of worms currently squirming away and about to cause big trouble in my opinion. Wait for it and the cries of disbelief and we never saw this coming from the idiots.

    Also as Rainey says the accumulation people will be able to update everything, take the world cruise and get a OAP worth up to $32000 for a couple plus the concessions. They'd be mad not to.

    So yes the politicians are just too incompetent to warrant all those perks in my opinion.
    Radish
    3rd Nov 2016
    12:30pm
    I have been on a few cruises as well and I concur with what you said Rae.

    All countries have different pension systems and it is like comparing apples with pears.
    Fredklaus
    1st Nov 2016
    10:22am
    Good time for another election will be after new pension limits are understood!

    1st Nov 2016
    11:23am
    Maree, you are kidding yourself and living with false hope. Most of the politicians are like Senator Bob Day of the Family First Party - the POLITICIANS' FAMILIES FIRST, NOT those whole foolishly elected them.
    Anonymous
    1st Nov 2016
    1:38pm
    I just heard that Day has finally resigned, after financially breaking many families with his shonky business and lack of ability to manage. One can see how he qualified for becoming a politician.
    Rodent
    1st Nov 2016
    12:38pm
    As I have said more than once- the Govt CLAIMS that people in these ASSET RANGES will receive an increase, yes they mentioned $30

    Single Home Owner with Assets of $209,000 and $291,000
    Single Non Home Owner with Assets of $360,500 and $539,500
    Couple Home Owner with Assets of $296,500 and $453,500
    Couple Non Home Owner with assets of $448,000 and $702,000

    This in spelled out in the letter from Centrelink that people should be receiving NOW
    HOWEVER as usual for the Govt this is TOTALLY MISLEADING because it ignores the Impact of the UNCHANGED Income Test.

    Some Pensioners will receive an increase, BUT others will not , especially at the Lower Values of the Ranges, where the Income Test will produce a Lower Pension outcome than the Assets Test
    For example in the Single Home Owner increases will apply ONLY where the Assets are in the $250,000 to $275,000 ranges
    For Single Non Home Owner Increases will apply ONLY where the Assets are in the $500,000 to $525,000 ranges
    For Couple Home Owner increases will apply ONLY where the Assets are in the $350,000 to $450,000 ranges
    For Couple Non Home Owners increases will apply ONLY where the Assets are in the $600,000 to $700,000 ranges

    In the case of a Couple Non Home Owner with $600,000 in Assets the INCREASE is very significant at $3490pa, and at $625,000 in Assets its also significant at $3003pa

    The Rebalance the Assets Test plan was to do a "Robin Hood" but the reality is not quite like that at all, its much worse for SOME, especially Single Home Owners COMPARED to others with the same Asset Values
    Old Geezer
    1st Nov 2016
    1:09pm
    Sounds fair to me with those sort of assets.
    gumtree
    1st Nov 2016
    1:03pm
    Hey Maree, and pigs may fly!
    Radish
    3rd Nov 2016
    9:24pm
    Are people aware that 80% of retirees are on a full or part pension!

    Only 20% are fully self funded!

    You can check these figures if you dont believe me.
    Rodent
    1st Nov 2016
    1:54pm
    Hey OG please help me out, I cant tell the difference between a SFR and an OAP on a boat, or anything I can see when looking at a picture of any these people. What are the differences to look for please, so I can tell, says he laughing out loud
    Old Geezer
    1st Nov 2016
    2:12pm
    It easy to tell which is which when you know how. There are certain traits that one sees straight away.

    Bit like being able to can pick out an Asperger's person a mile off.

    All you need to do is some people watching.
    Tom Tank
    1st Nov 2016
    6:32pm
    I feel so humble to be replying to someone so outstanding who can not only pick out an OAP on a cruise but can easily pick out someone with Asberger's.
    Just for your information OG Asperger's is no longer considered to be a separate condition but to be on the Autism spectrum.
    However I suspect you will now astound us all again with your powers of observation.
    They must surely make you a subject for Marvel Comic Books.
    Old Geezer
    1st Nov 2016
    7:18pm
    Yes it can has been called Asperger's or high functioning autism and is now considered part of the autism spectrum. However Asperger's has aspects that other autistic people don't one being the famous university professor's walk.

    I have no interest at all in Marvel Conic books which have nothing to do with autism. Merely super heroes of someone's vivid imagination that makes zillions for "Hollywood".
    TREBOR
    1st Nov 2016
    9:05pm
    Easy, Rodent - the SFRs dress better, have better cabins, and do more cruises than the commoners....
    Old Geezer
    1st Nov 2016
    10:40pm
    Trebor unfortunately you have got it very wrong.
    Rodent
    2nd Nov 2016
    5:17pm
    Sorry OG, still laughing out loud, as are other people here about your perspectives here.

    Trebor I suspect you are right, about Dress, Cabins etc

    OG The master of divergence !!!

    OG A good Book for you to read
    Australian Spirit - Editor Christine Lister
    Old Geezer
    2nd Nov 2016
    6:43pm
    Now you have me laughing and shaking my head in amasement.

    Rodent you have no idea either open your eyes and you will see.

    Maybe it takes a SFR to notice another one.
    Captain
    2nd Nov 2016
    6:52pm
    OG, your powers of observation are outstanding. I have been more than 50% deaf for all of my life so observation has been a major part of my life.
    I do admit that being able to pick SFR's from pensioners on a cruise by looking at their traits is absolutely fabulous. I for one would find it extremely difficult, especially if I rarely went on cruises, and television observations are even better.

    Sir Arthur Conan Doyle would find you stiff opposition.
    Old Geezer
    3rd Nov 2016
    1:25pm
    Captain I too have a hearing problem but have learnt to lip read very well. I think when you lose one sense the others get better. My sight is good and I find that I can sit at one end of a train carriage and "ears drop" on the conversation taking place at the other end of the carriage. I certainly "hear" so interesting things.

    I do occasionally go on a cruise ship and off with the family on one later this month. Yes I paid the bill for the cruise.
    particolor
    3rd Nov 2016
    6:43pm
    Not on the Ordinary OAP your not :-( Unless your related to another on this Site, Who manages to Bank $600 a Month :-) :-) :-) Centrelink should drop around and Check these Wealthy People out :-) :-) :-)
    Joy Anne
    1st Nov 2016
    3:36pm
    Cranky, I totally agree with your comments. Our pollies are only in the job to fix themselves up and their mates. LNP could not care about pensioners or in that fact people of Australia. Just what they can get. No pensions or perks for retired pollies. Also cut back or cancel all perks whilst a Politian. They can afford with the salary they get to afford perks.
    We are told that END OF ENTITLEMENT IS HERE - WELL THAT SHOULD INCLUDE POLLIES.
    Old Geezer
    1st Nov 2016
    3:42pm
    Rubbish the OAP is more than enough for a basic retirement as it was designed to provide.
    Rodent
    1st Nov 2016
    4:34pm
    OG as I have said before, you really have no idea of the real world, as it applies to OAP

    Even if the OAP was enough for basic Retirement why is a Non Home Owner Couple going to receive $32,432pa, after 1 Jan 2017 with $600,000 in assets , while at the SAME Asset Figure the Single Home Owner will receive ZERO pension? If the system was fair it would seem that an "equivalent" Single Pension amount would be paid to the Single Pensioner.

    Before you reply just remember what you said at you earlier post today @ 1.09pm.

    Your the same person who had also said, more than once some people should receive NOTHING in the form of a Pension, yet now you appear to not be at all concerned by people being paid $30kpa with $600k in Assets, you lack of consistency on Pension related matters is quite extraordinary.
    Old Geezer
    1st Nov 2016
    4:49pm
    A non-home owner should be allowed more assets because they simply don't own a million dollar mansion. A single home owner has ample to live on with $600,000 without the OAP until they get down to a level where they qualify for the OAP. Remember OAP is welfare that is paid to old people for the basics of life not for a comfortable life.

    It is easily fixed by adding the house to the assets test and deducting all pension payments from a person's estate when they die. A level playing field for all of us.
    Tom Tank
    1st Nov 2016
    5:11pm
    OG where do you get the notion that Aged Pension is welfare? Oh yes from the LNP yet it was Robt Menzies who declared that the Aged Pension was an entitlement to be paid from tax receipts after he took the amount accrued by a Pension scheme, setup by the ALP, into Consolidated Revenue.

    Old Pig Iron Bob would be horrified at the current right wing leanings of the Liberal Party.
    Old Geezer
    1st Nov 2016
    5:15pm
    OAP is now welfare. Back in old Bob's day anyone got the OAP when they reached retirement age but that is not so today. It may have been an entitlement way back then but that's certainly not the case today.

    It is nothing more than a welfare payment for those who haven't the resources for the basics of life.
    Old Man
    1st Nov 2016
    5:57pm
    Wrong Old Geezer, back in Menzies' day there was a means test. He did get legislation through that the means test would not apply on reaching 70 and he applied for the age pension when he turned 70. He also received his parliamentary pension which caused a big enough outcry to have his legislation repealed.
    Old Geezer
    1st Nov 2016
    6:08pm
    My father got the OAP when he turned 70 without a means test so there wasn't a means test back in those days. Turning 70 is not a means test.
    Old Man
    1st Nov 2016
    8:25pm
    There was a means test on reaching 65 Old Geezer. Please reread my previous post. Menzies changed it so on reaching 70 that the means test no longer applied but this legislation was repealed after Menzies accessed the age pension as well as his parliamentary pension.
    Triss
    1st Nov 2016
    10:32pm
    Just to be clear, Old Geezer, when you say "A level playing field for all of us" you are including politicians, bureaucrats, judges, teachers, etc as well as the age pensioners, are you?
    Old Geezer
    2nd Nov 2016
    12:52pm
    Let get one thing clear the OAP is not a pension it is a welfare payment. All the others are pensions determined by how much you contributed to your own pension fund. The OAP is paid only to some and has no relationship to anything contributed. There fore it is merely a welfare payment.
    particolor
    2nd Nov 2016
    8:14pm
    For Crying Out Loud !! Let him Win !! Or well never hear the End of WELFARE !! WELFARE !! WELFARE !!! :-( :-( :-(
    Captain
    2nd Nov 2016
    8:17pm
    If the OAP, (old age pension) is actually welfare, should it not be old age welfare?
    Triss
    2nd Nov 2016
    8:58pm
    No, Old Geezer, I can't agree with you. The public service pension debt is well over $300 billion and rising because for a long time no-one put money in for their pensions. A dodgy policy was agreed that anyone in the public service would be feather bedded and the rest could have any crumbs that were left.
    Tricky Dicky
    1st Nov 2016
    4:09pm
    Hey old geezer about time you stopped watching and started doing. Some of the so called rich are really just above broke. As they saying goes 'looks good, smells good but tastes rotten" So get out and do some real tasting "you can't judge a book by its cover"
    Old Geezer
    1st Nov 2016
    4:17pm
    That's exactly what I am doing. Filling in time while travelling around together with my mobile office. If that's what you call tastes rotten then so be it. Only people that are just over broke are people with JOBs. Not sure you wold want to live in a world where I was broke as it just wouldn't be very pretty for anyone.

    You certainly wouldn't want to judge this book by it's over.
    particolor
    2nd Nov 2016
    8:44pm
    Id rather lean on the Deck Rail and pick the Old Age Pensioners from the Self Funded Retirees :-) :-) :-) It fills in My Dull life :-) :-)
    ourjeffie
    1st Nov 2016
    5:18pm
    I'm a single homeowner with assets of just over $250,000. I have calculated that from 1 January I will get an increase of around $60 per fortnight. I must be doing something wrong.
    Old Geezer
    1st Nov 2016
    6:15pm
    People like you deserve the extra $30.
    Rodent
    2nd Nov 2016
    7:47am
    Dear ourjeffie

    Good Luck to you, you are CORRECT. At the $250,000 Asset Figure a Single Home Owner after 1 Jan 2017 will get the Max Pension of $22,804pa which in your example will increase you pension by $1599pa or $61.50 per Fortnight

    For once Old Geezer your comments are respectful and accurate
    Radish
    3rd Nov 2016
    12:34pm
    I am hoping that with the reduced assets threshold the money saved will go towards giving increased pensions to those who are on full single and married pensions.
    Retired
    1st Nov 2016
    5:20pm
    The neo-liberal Coalition and the neo-liberal Right Wing of the Labor Party would rather fly 20 miles in a helicopter or have their dogs chauffeur driven to second house than give us poverty stricken pensioners $30.
    particolor
    3rd Nov 2016
    6:38pm
    Don't hold your Breath :-( :-(
    Triss
    1st Nov 2016
    10:05pm
    I'll stand by your side, Cranky. I've been fuming about this for quite a time now. How is it that the Age Pension is called welfare but not the pensions of ex teachers, ex Centrelink employees and politicians, etc? All pensions come out of the same taxpayers' pockets. It's not as if public service employees paid any more for their pensions . According to The Austrlian hte budget outcome for 2015-16 shows a sum of $314bn would be required to cover public sector superannuation liabilities at the government bond rate of 2.7 per cent, up from $248bn a year ago. It seems that because of a dodgy policy that made the Age Pension a welfare payout every government can use it as its piggy bank to pay off everybody elses debt.
    Old Geezer
    2nd Nov 2016
    12:21pm
    The word pension is a word just to describe a certain type of income. The OAP should be called Seniors Welfare Payment as it is not a true pension.
    Rae
    2nd Nov 2016
    2:36pm
    Look up State Super, First State Super, Commonwealth Super Triss.

    The public servants save into those funds. Lots and lots of savings, often after paying full tax and for decade after decade.

    If the government has neglected to pay their share then that is something different but the worker has paid and paid for the retirement income received.

    It is paid by the Super Fund not by Centrelink so is not from tax payer revenue at all.
    Triss
    2nd Nov 2016
    9:11pm
    The government public pension debt is over $300 billion and rising. Where do you think the money for that debt is coming from? The taxpayers will be landed with it. I should imagine also that many public servants have gone well past the amount of money they paid and are now living care of the taxpayers.
    Radish
    3rd Nov 2016
    12:36pm
    I paid 6% of my income into my super fund and even added an exta 4% in the five years before I retired....making a total of 10% of my fortnightly wage.

    So to say public servants did not pay into a fund is a lie.
    Radish
    3rd Nov 2016
    12:38pm
    I would like to add this was 29 years ago when I upped it to 10%.
    particolor
    1st Nov 2016
    10:22pm
    Exactly Debbie.. We will not get a Brass Razoo !!
    Retired
    1st Nov 2016
    10:27pm
    Age Pensioners should vote out every government at every election until the government raises the pension to 7.5 % of GDP.
    Voting is our best weapon against this government persecution.
    Triss
    1st Nov 2016
    10:35pm
    Voting is only our best weapon, Retired, if we tell the sitting MP's that they're about to lose their seats because of us.
    particolor
    1st Nov 2016
    10:38pm
    People OAPs just had their chance to Banish the Pigs !! But didn't :-( :-(
    missmarple
    2nd Nov 2016
    1:50am
    Gee Old Geezer life living with you must be sooo much fun NOT, you sound like a very bitter old person, get a life
    Tricky Dicky
    2nd Nov 2016
    9:03am
    yea verily that is the truth
    Retired
    2nd Nov 2016
    9:31am
    Old Geezer is a paid Coalition Troll.
    I ignore him.
    Old Geezer
    2nd Nov 2016
    12:19pm
    Unfortunately I have nothing at all to do with any political party. I represent those who pay the taxes that fund welfare so I lobby to have my tax spend well not wasted where it is not needed.
    Rodent
    2nd Nov 2016
    10:28am
    Just as Information. This may help to explain where some of us oldies formed the view that the Pension being paid for by taxes -ie an Entitlement

    Recent article by Noel Whittaker

    When the financial planning industry was in its infancy, I often heard older people talk about the way the pension system used to be. According to their recollections, a portion of all income tax was hived off and credited to a separate fund, out of which a pension would be paid for life.
    Because it was all so vague, and because there was nothing on any of my old tax returns that mentioned the alleged fund, I never took it seriously.
    Digging a bit deeper
    Then just before the last election, I was bombarded with emails readers had received from the Mature Australia Party. The title was certainly a barbeque stopper: “The big lie – the age pension is not welfare!”
    The email claimed, “Older people spent their lifetimes paying for their pensions with an early version of the compulsory superannuation scheme. In 1945, the Commonwealth split personal income tax into two components. One of them, the social services contribution, was to be used exclusively to finance Social Security cash payments. The revenue from the contributions was paid into a National Welfare Fund.”
    It said that by 1950, the balance in the fund was £100 million, which would be several trillion dollars in today’s money. According to the email, in 1977, Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser transferred the balance to Consolidated Revenue but to this day, the contribution is still coming out of everybody’s pay packet.
    These ‘revelations’ started me on a journey to find out the truth, which culminated with my finding the seminal book on the subject, The Foundations of the National Welfare State, written by Rob Watts in 1987 and published by Allen and Unwin.
    Watts claims that the idea for a National Welfare Fund started in February 1943, when Treasurer Ben Chifley was finding ways to fund Australia’s contribution to the Second World War. The Curtin Government had publicly vowed never to tax low income earners, but they faced a major problem – a shortage of money.
    At that stage, the states were raising their own income taxes, but the Curtin Government decided it could boost its own coffers claiming taxing rights. The states objected strongly, but on 23 July 1942, the High Court upheld the right of the Commonwealth to take over taxation.
    The need to raise money
    By the end of 1942, the Curtin Government had to find an additional £40 million, but what kind of spin could they put on it so it could not be described as a tax increase? They talked about introducing a separate Social Security tax, but decided that such a move would create administrative difficulties and confusion. In the end, it was simpler to raise taxes across the board.
    And so the National Welfare Fund was born. True, a part of all taxes received were paid into it, and certain pensions were paid out of it. But no taxpayer had a separate balance in their own name, so there was no possibility that monies paid in would be allocated to a particular contributor.
    The years passed, governments changed, and eventually they ended the charade of a separate welfare fund. Any money left was transferred to Consolidated Revenue, from where the money for social security benefits now comes.
    Now, some minor political parties are agitating for the money that was originally in the National Welfare Fund to be paid to older people, on the grounds that it was their money all the time. The sad reality is that there is nothing there to pay out. It’s all gone down the vast black hole called ‘government’.

    Noel Whittaker is the author of Making Money Made Simple and numerous other books on personal finance. His advice is general in nature and readers should seek their own professional advice before making any financial decisions. Email: noel@noelwhittaker.com.au
    Old Geezer
    2nd Nov 2016
    10:55am
    That explains nicely why the OAP is welfare.
    particolor
    17th Dec 2016
    9:00pm
    I think you've got Welfaritis in the Vacuum between your Ears !! :-( :-(
    particolor
    17th Dec 2016
    9:03pm
    We are now to be known as..."Old Age Wefairyans " :-) :-)
    Renny
    2nd Nov 2016
    1:57pm
    Hey Triss. My teacher pension isn't called welfare because I paid for it. If and when I get any age pension it won't be welfare either. I paid tax for 45 years so I consider OAP an entitlement. As it should be for everyone. But I don't mind means testing as long as it's fair. I have some friends on OAP only and they are doing it tough. Not fair at all.
    Old Geezer
    2nd Nov 2016
    4:20pm
    If you get the OAP you will be on welfare.
    particolor
    2nd Nov 2016
    8:05pm
    Welfare = A system where the Government takes responsibility for the Social, Economic SECURITY of its Citizens. Yeah OK !!
    Rations :-) :-)
    Gigi
    17th Dec 2016
    8:24pm
    The Aged Pension is NOT an entitlement, Aged Pension has never been linked with paying taxes, was ONLY a safety nett. IF one has Super then expecting a Government Aged Pension doesn't bode well for those on Full Pension. If some individuals weren't so Entitled to more than they deserve than those on a full pension may end up with more than $22800 a year to subsist on.
    Gigi
    17th Dec 2016
    8:07pm
    Can't compare Australian pensions with England or Italy, is obvious that both countries have financial issues which we don't. The Aged Pension was introduced as Safety Net 1908 other than Service Pensions in 30's no change occurred until Keating introduced Super.
    NO ONE who can pay themselves (if you can pay oneself $30,000 a year) should not have their hand out for am Aged Pension. Perhaps if individuals had a change in their belief system which makes one entitled to such handout, Full Pensioners may get a more equitable Pension
    Boof
    18th Dec 2016
    3:30pm
    I agree with Rainy. Short & simple. O. G. Must be related to "Alice in Wonderland", or has recently been living there.
    rtrish
    8th Jan 2017
    12:05pm
    Thanks for clarifying that. I also mistakenly believed I might get an increase. I kept hopefully checking the myGov website! But no, nothing extra in the kitty at the moment. Scomo should be careful how he phrases things.
    FIN
    25th Jan 2017
    8:56am
    Many comments here, lots of hear say. I just have a hard fact to add, my wife and I (age pension) both receive $661.2 each fortnight, independent of perceptions about how much money we do or don't have. From that we have to pay all our bills, house maintenance, food and clothing.
    I encourage you to sit down with a calculator, pencil and paper, spread sheet or whatever and work out how much is left over.
    There is a pension organisation, it's called Combined Superannuants and Pensioners Association. I am a member of that.


    Join YOURLifeChoices, it’s free

    • Receive our daily enewsletter
    • Enter competitions
    • Comment on articles