15th Nov 2017

Elderly renters more likely to end up homeless

Renters face homelessness risk
Olga Galacho

Mission Australia has called for a revamp of retirement payments, especially to older people who do not own their own home.

In a report titled Ageing and Homelessness: solutions to a growing problem, the organisation stated that older Australians who rented were more likely to become homeless as the Age Pension failed to keep up with their housing costs.

“Those who become homeless for the first time later in life are likely to have been private renters with a stable housing history who have experienced significant health problems, family problems, unaffordable rent, eviction or accessibility problems,” Mission Australia explained.

“A review of retirement incomes is required to ensure that older people can meet the cost of living. A particular focus is needed on social security payments for older people who do not own their own home and single older people, including the growing numbers of older women at risk of homelessness.”



Mission Australia Chief Executive Catherine Yeomans called for a commitment from governments to build 60,000 extra public housing dwellings specifically for older people.

 “If funding was made available to build one new supported aged care facility in each state each year, that would have a meanful impact on addressing the current shortfall.”

In 1996, the shortfall of private and affordable rental dwellings for low-income households was estimated to be 150,000. By 2011, the shortfall had increased to 271,000,  according to the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute.

Anglicare research shows that just 1.62 per cent of available rental stock is “affordable and appropriate” for a single person on an Age Pension. For couples on an Age Pension, that rises to 4.28 per cent.

Mission Australia pointed to Australian Bureau of Statistics data that showed 14 per cent of people aged 65 to 84 years were renters and 11 per cent of those aged 85 and over lived in rented housing.

On social security payments, Mission Australia said a review should:

  • consider the adequacy of payments for older people in the private rental market with a focus on Commonwealth Rental Assistance to prevent rental stress and reduce risks of homelessness;
  • analyse payments for older people under the current pensionable age in the private rental market; and
  • recognise the disadvantages experienced by older women and others who have had extensive periods out of the workforce.

 

Opinion: Single pensioners deserve more

Unless you want to move to Woop Woop, as a single retiree with few assets and no other form of income, your rental housing options are likely to be as rare as hen’s teeth. That’s because the Age Pension and Rental Assistance are not enough to cover the costs of living somewhere “appropriate”, under Mission Australia’s definition. There, it has been said.

In fact, here at YourLifeChoices we are hoarse from pointing out this bleedingly obvious truth, quarter after quarter, year in, year out. But that won’t stop us from doing it all over again next month with our December 2017 update of the Retirement Affordability Index.

Our own joint research with The Australia Institute published in the September 2017 Retirement Affordability Index revealed the cost of living for each of six retirement ‘tribes’.

The biggest group of Age Pensioners at 29 per cent were single homeowners who on average spent $450 a week on bare necessities. At 14 per cent of the retired population, single people who had to rent spent around $430 a week.

When you consider a full Age Pension is a mere $447 a week, you can see that there is going to be a very big shortfall. So, is it any wonder that a growing group of older Australians are joining the ranks of the homeless because they can’t afford to pay the rent?

Data from CoreLogic in 2016 suggested that apart from Western Australia, housing rentals in most other parts of the nation were broadly stagnant. And thank heavens for that, because they are already very unaffordable if your only income is the Age Pension.

The rental review showed median rents for units were $330 a week in NSW and Queensland; $250 in Victoria; $200 in South Australia; $320 in Western Australia; and $230 in Tasmania. It goes without saying that median rents for houses rather than flats were considerably higher. Data for the territories was not made available.

So just to recap: if you live in NSW and are paying roughly $330 a week in rent, the small change is around $117. Add rental assistance to this and you have just $268 left with which to buy food and medicines, pay for utilities and transport, and other basic costs of living.

These stark figures should no longer just be bandied around. They are a real reflection of how tough some people are doing it through no fault of their own. And, as Mission Australia explains, the Government must review upwards the social security payments made to renters now because many of them can no longer afford to have a roof over their heads.

How much is left over of your pension each week? Are you concerned you may end up homeless following an unexpected event?

Related articles:
Older women at risk of homelessness
Ban ‘no cause eviction’ call
Public housing for over-55s





COMMENTS

To make a comment, please register or login
MICK
16th Nov 2017
10:49am
We need to build "60,000 extra public housing dwellings"? I thought governments got out of the housing market. Now what do we have? If negative gearing is taken away watch the next step. Horrific.
I find you serve at moving to Woop Woop disturbing Olga. People need to go where they can afford and people who WANT to live in Sydney but cannot afford it need to reassess their circumstances rather than cry homelessness.
I would think the only people who truly become homeless are those with mental issues, drug, gambling or alcohol addictions and those who cannot/will not manage money properly.
Please correct me if I am wrong but is it not possible to get a room for $100 a week? Maybe nix if you want to do a little work around the house?
I hate to sound heartless as it disturbs me that we have so many homeless people but I continue to ask how many of these fokf are homeless by circumstance rather than choices. A response to that question is really welcomed as my view of this may be wrong. Please explain!
Kathleen
16th Nov 2017
11:46am
I don’t think you are wrong actually.
There may be exceptions but, overall, your assessment is correct.
Many move away from the big cities in order to afford to live more comfortably.
For those who are able bodied and can offer some assistance in the home to other elderly people who are disabled or some baby sitting etc. to acquire room and board or partial room and board in exchange for services.
There must be other creative ways to solve this too like house sharing for elderly women.
Old Man
16th Nov 2017
2:03pm
I agree MICK, my mate's sisters moved from the city to a small town in the middle of Victoria with not a lot to offer. Housing was readily available and, in fact, they were able to buy a house and are now living quite well. They tell me that what they have missed out on by moving from the city is more than made up by the friendliness of the locals.

Thankfully, we don't yet have to make a decision about downsizing and I hope that will continue. To move to another area where we know nobody would be very hard and I empathise with those who are forced to make that choice.
Anonymous
16th Nov 2017
2:55pm
I have fallen into bad health and hard times. I need to be where I live in Sydney because my medical, social and support networks are all here in Sydney. I'm on a Disability Support Pension. I'd love to work, but my medical needs preclude it. Homelessness would be a death sentence for me. Affordable and suitable social housing is the only viable alternative for me. Otherwise I'm screwed.
TREBOR
16th Nov 2017
4:58pm
I will now accept plaudits from the DSP community, for my campaign against Wee Johnnie just before his Downfall, that lead to DSP people getting Utilities Allowance.

Simply pointing out that we had 'classes' of pensioner, and creating the circulated Reality Cheque online created sufficient momentum for him to desperately declare (drrrummmmm rrrrooooolllll) Equality of Pensioners.

That also applied to VA Pensioners in some ways and instances, and there are now more issues involved there - at the moment and pending my renos before I get into the Veteran support and advocacy service - I don't have the time to pursue them all, but a lot of younger Diggers and Matelots and Airedales are being short-sheeted.

As the doc on Omaha Beach said in 1944 - every man here deserves a Purple Heart - well - I'm with Lenny Schultz - every man here deserves a TPI or a guarantee of an income for life, through some alternative arrangement that we will negotiate.
TREBOR
16th Nov 2017
5:00pm
Oh, sorry - and I enlisted the ABC in fronting Wee Johnnie over this 'second class pensioner' nonsense - thank you, auntie ABC.
Capn Dan
16th Nov 2017
11:43am
Yeah, don't come out to Woop Woop where the air is clean, housing cheap and people friendly. Stay in the big smoke and enjoy sleeping on the street as you watch the big shots sip coffee and eat fancy food you can't afford. In Woop Woop you can have nice morning teas at the CWA hall and time to enjoy your affordable garden for food and pleasure. I have time to make home brew beer and time to enjoy it with friends. You have it so good in the city where all the money goes just stay there. Your contry cousin out a Woop Woop.
Triss
16th Nov 2017
12:56pm
One thing you haven’t thought of, Capn Dan, many elderly folk need a certain amount of help which comes from family members. They are not going to get that help if they’re living 200 klms away from their family.
It is also a fact that moving elderly people away from familiar places can cause clinical depression.
Tib
16th Nov 2017
1:05pm
Capn Dan I couldn't agree more. What advantages would a person have in the city , better shopping, better restaurants, going to the theatre and art galleries, nothing that is any use to someone with no money.
As long as there is a good hospital in the country I would much rather live in the woop woop.
Hasbeen
16th Nov 2017
2:36pm
Come off it Triss, if these people were getting family support, they would not be homeless.

I also agree ourt author aught to try Woop Woop, they would find it a revelation, of how much more pleasant it is than the stuffed city. My father in law was a bit of a borderline alcoholic. He moved into a pretty basic weekender we had in a very small coastal village. No pub within many miles, & no car meant he was restricted to some extent.

Friendly neighbours would take him shopping, & helped in other ways. Once fully sober he had a great life. Fishing with boat owners, secretary of the local progress association, & friendly company always available. In fact he became a welcome pillar of the community in a remarkably short tine, rather than an anomalous face in the crowd.

One has to wonder at any advice given by someone who would denigrate a community by it's distance from a city. Total lack of any knowledge is probably the problem there.
Triss
16th Nov 2017
3:06pm
I wasn’t talking about total homelessness, Hasbeen, but moving away in order to find less expensive accommodation.
Old Geezer
16th Nov 2017
3:41pm
All they need is a whiz bang and they can then live In it and annoy people around where they park all night with their whiz banging.
TREBOR
16th Nov 2017
4:44pm
Aye, Skipper.... there be truth in what ye says! Had the houses in the city and the bush - happy in a small friendly town here.
TREBOR
16th Nov 2017
5:01pm
Yes, Triss - where are the families in all this?
Rosret
16th Nov 2017
7:58pm
Its good in theory and if I was looking at homelessness I would certainly back my bags and move to outer woop woop.
However the elderly do need their infrastructure and family. While we may love our family it is not always beneficial to the children's relationship if "mother-in-law" moves in.
To never see my family again would break my heart. Young adult children just don't have time to drive that far and a person on the pension doesn't have the money to entertain.
Its one thing to fly capital city to capital city its another to make a 5 hour drive into the never never.
Rae
17th Nov 2017
4:19pm
Hard enough getting out of the housing estates for some as they age Rosret. It's not going to be pretty unless charity groups up the ante.
Theo1943
18th Nov 2017
10:38am
I can see the rental fees in Woop Woop increasing dramatically shortly with a huge influx of oldies. What's the going rate today?
Capn Dan
20th Nov 2017
10:26am
Love the 'Ship Creek' comment. Might steal it. Anyhow, interesting comments about the Woop Woop article. Just a comment or two. My place in inner Woop Woop is a big block with old workers family house. Handy to the hospital and everything else in a country town an hour from beaches or bigger shops. Know a little about health issues and happy to have recently had the all clear on one myself. Up northern Qld we have an RACQ rescue helicopter for miners or citizens and can be in Mackay hospital fast. The mortgage is just over $400 a month and rates about $250 month. The bank wanted to give more than needed, so cheaper than rent. Best climate. Plenty to do including top-up work at the correct rate. Cheers from Woop Woop!
KB
16th Nov 2017
11:43am
This is a very important issue that must be tackled by Federal and state government.There are genuine older people who are at risk of homslessness.
ray from Bondi
16th Nov 2017
9:48pm
here here
Nan Norma
16th Nov 2017
11:56am
Mick, I expect a lot is to do with wrong choice (not bad choices) We can all look back in hindsight at what would have been a better choice. Older people often need the kind of support which is unlikely to be available in "woop woop" In the coming years we may possibly have the same problem when the young people of today, that can't afford to buy a home, come to retire. There go I but for the grace of God.
What about the unemployed? There are many genuine people that can't find work. They really are living in poverty, often becoming outcasts by society.
TREBOR
16th Nov 2017
4:46pm
..and they come from a different time, Mick, when things were a lot simpler and a lot less run by greed.

WADR - our immigration values had a lot to do with that.
East of Toowoomba
16th Nov 2017
8:56pm
You are right Nan Norma about the unemployed. Newstart is worth about 2/3 of aged or disability pension BUT they are not allowed to move to an area with fewer employment prospects, without losing their benefit for a period of time as a penalty.

Anyone who doesn't own their own home at the time they become unemployed may well find themselves homeless, before finding themselves a job.
Retired Knowall
18th Nov 2017
7:25am
I have an article written more than 50 years ago espousing the virtues of renting as apposed to buying a house. The article argues that it was much better to pay rent and invest the savings from not having to service a loan, pay rates, insurance and maintenance.
How many would still argue this proposal?
Rainey
20th Nov 2017
8:36am
I read such articles many times and every time I analysed the argument and ran the numbers and proved the authors WRONG. Over the years, generally, I believe I was far better off owning a home.
Blossom
16th Dec 2017
7:26pm
East of Toowoomba, I heard that Newstart is a lot worse as out of pocket expensives money they have to spend to search for jobs which often involve phone calls,and of course travelling can be quite high. They have to report to a Centrelink approved Job Agency regularly (I think it is every 3 weeks). Not all Employment Agencies are on Centrelink list even though many of them are more helpful in helping people find jobs.
Charlie
16th Nov 2017
12:01pm
The states with the cheapest rents are likely to have the highest heating costs, so no point in moving there. Go too far north, maybe there's a little less in rent, but there's air conditioning costs. Somebody has got it all worked out and its not the tenant.

When the government does provide some accommodation its only very basic to get people off the streets.
Before the average pensioner (squeezed out by high rent) can get a flat they have to be placed behind a long line of people who have become homeless because they have lost control of their lives, either through poor health, addiction, or lack of life management skills.

Probably the best outcome for a pensioner is be able to get a flat with good neighbours, thru a cheaper deal with an owner or estate agent. Trouble is, once a persons resources fall below the bond and 4 weeks rent, its hard to got something of good quality.

There have been some recent housing schemes where the government pays the estate agent money to bring about affordable rent, but these seem to get scrapped because of agents manipulating prices to get more funding. Or they simply don't want to have their prices fixed, in case a suburb suddenly becomes a high growth area.

I lived in new south wales for a time and they seem to have a lot of government funded accommodation, even for their aboriginal population.
This is in stark contrast to North Queensland that has very little of any kind.

Government funded housing has one main disadvantage from a planning perspective, in that they create neighbourhoods of "desperados".
On the other hand, one sees on the news occasionally about the "neighbour from hell" in what is supposed to be a perfectly good neighbourhood.

All said I don't think (some state governments) are doing enough to provide accommodation for pensioners.
Tib
16th Nov 2017
1:11pm
I think this is a serious issue that will only get worse as rents rise. Without negative gearing rents will probably rise faster. At least this article is a little more balanced previous stories focused only on women as lf male homelessness didn't matter.
Raphael
16th Nov 2017
1:44pm
Just wait -article coming soon calling for women’s pension to be higher than men’s as they have to spend more on sanitary products
Triss
16th Nov 2017
1:56pm
Just wait- next article for male pensions to be higher as they have to spend more than women on shaving needs. Shaving every day, Raphael, not once a month...or didn't your mum tell you about the 'birds and the bees'?
Raphael
16th Nov 2017
2:00pm
I agree men’s pensions need to be higher as they have more expenses
Tib
16th Nov 2017
2:06pm
What an excellent point Triss men's pensions do need to be higher. We finally agree on something.
Tib
16th Nov 2017
2:18pm
Raphael must be time for another one of those articles about " what women want" as if I give a rats.
KSS
16th Nov 2017
2:31pm
Not relevant Raphael if you are a woman on a retirement pension! Those 'birds and bees' again! :-)
Tib
16th Nov 2017
2:35pm
KSS what about a disability pension.
Raphael
16th Nov 2017
2:42pm
KSS - I have no idea . I only date women under 45
Old Geezer
16th Nov 2017
2:47pm
Elderly women using sanitary products? Continence products maybe.

Many elderly women have to shave too so spend money on having products too. Men can grow beards but women just don't look good in beards.

I suppose those flowers would increase a man's expenses.
Tib
16th Nov 2017
2:52pm
OG you have a way of taking all the magic and mystery out of everything ;).
KSS
16th Nov 2017
2:53pm
Tib I did qualify the comment by referring to RETIREMENT pension. A payment you cannot obtain until well after need for such products has passed! :-]
Tib
16th Nov 2017
3:03pm
KSS You're right you did ! But Raphael only said pension. :)
Hasbeen
16th Nov 2017
3:18pm
Great, so where should these higher pensions come from.

I know! the young, like my 28 year old daughter. Highly qualified, good job reasonable income, she must have plenty.

Wrong. She & her husband worked their guts our saving every penny to get a home, no money for fun, but worth it.

Bought an acre out of town, & built a reasonable home on it, no McMansion, but nice. It was cheaper than an established home in town, or building there. A year later she was pregnant. Not planned, but it happens.

With the cost of child care she went back to work on 3 days a week the best financial option. Even less money for fun, they ate a lot of mince & sausages. 18 months of this was too much for him, & he ran away.

With some help financially, & her mum doing the child care, we have managed to keep her in the house, working full time, but 150 kilometres away means her mother is only home here for 48 hours a week. Hopefully we can avoid my daughter becoming a homeless oldie, but it is a struggle.

This kind of sob story is all too common for today's kids, but that's fine. How much more tax do you think she should pay to support those who perhaps should have struggled as hard to avoid homelessness themselves.
Old Geezer
16th Nov 2017
3:38pm
Also there are simply not enough young people today employed to pay the welfare system as it stands without trying to squeeze them for any extra.

I know f family today with 4 children who have completed school in their late teens and early 20s without jobs. As they are all under 22 this family cannot earn more than about $50,000 a year or all 4 of them lose their $150 a week youth allowance. That's a lot of money to lose for a couple for $1000 or so extra income.
Tib
16th Nov 2017
3:39pm
Hasbeen they could get all the money they need by getting big business to pay their taxes and by not giving them so much of our money. Problem solved.... Next!
Old Geezer
16th Nov 2017
3:44pm
We should just stop buying products from these companies shifting their profits off shore until they pay their taxes here. Problem solved.
TREBOR
16th Nov 2017
4:47pm
.. and then there are reparations for the vicissitudes of feminism..........
Tib
16th Nov 2017
5:08pm
OG maybe that's an option. But I don't think it's unreasonable to expect our government to collect these taxes without our help , after all it's what we pay them for.
TREBOR
16th Nov 2017
5:11pm
The problem isn't any imposition on the younger set or their relative lack of numbers - it is about that younger set manning up (womanning up) and doing what we did - pay our dues to those who made our country worth living in - AND the lack of genuine opportunity to prosper for at least one in six of our current workforce.

My grandmother, for instance, live through the Boer War, WWI, WWII where she lost a son and had my father serving in New Guinea, and her grand-children in other wars etc... not to mention the Great Depression.

My favourite Nanna - a Scottish lady and mother of my dad's sister's husband, had lost her husband (my uncle's father) in WWI and had served her part in raising a family and prospering here in Australia.

I think they deserved their pension as a Right - considering that the taxes that they and their husbands paid through life contributed to it - as I've laid out for you all times many.

Now it is a different time - but the same issue..... if the youngies feel it is a burden to support the elderly, they can accept a higher tax to pay back for their support up until they become self-sufficient, and a premium for all the roads, railways, universities, and all the other infrastructure that they enjoy to the max these days.

Then the government - in its generous way (LMAO) - can hand more money out to pensioners.
Tib
16th Nov 2017
5:19pm
Trebor reparations from feminists, you would have more chance of getting war reparations from the Nazis. But we have to stop giving the witches more money.
Hasbeen
16th Nov 2017
10:22pm
Trebor you are forgetting how much easier it was for us.

When I bought my first house in 1961 it was a 4 room dump, with a toilet down the back yard, but it was only 2 years salary. From that salary I paid only 7.25% tax, & the interest on my loan was only 3.75%. You couldn't even find such a place today to help get a start.

A few years later I upgraded to an ex housing commission house in a less than impressive suburb, but it cost only 5 years salary, & there was nothing wrong with the neighbours either.

Today you have to pay 8 or 9 years salary for something similar, out of a salary reduced by 30%+ tax, & it will be a lot further out. We supported a much smaller percentage of pensioners, unemployed & bludgers back then, & if you think the pension is low today, compare what it was in the 60s.

Yes living on a pension is not a bed of roses, I should know after over a decade as one myself, but it is a damn site harder for kids today, than it was for us.
Rainey
17th Nov 2017
6:53pm
Speak for yourself, Has been! I would challenge you to find a younger Australian anywhere who did it nearly as tough as I did. And my first home was also a dump with a toilet down the back but it cost 8 years salary, at 7.5% interest - rising to 18%. All the young folk I know are paying around 4% interest for a newish brick and tile 4bed/2+ bath with 2 living rooms, double garage and professionally landscaped yard.

Some young folk are doing it tough. Some young folk are living it up. No different to decades ago. There have always been those who were doing it tough and those who had it easy. Most of my friends left school at 15 and were working full-time in low-paid unskilled jobs for most of their working lives (if not all). At least most young folk today get to finish school!
Old Geezer
18th Nov 2017
7:26pm
Rainey young folk today have to stay at school until 17 and a lot would be better off leaving school at 15 as all they do is play up and make it harder for the ones that want to learn.

Many young people today rent and it is not unusual or 4 or 5 couples to live in one house. Many can't save the deposit let alone meet the repayments even at 4 % interest.
Rainey
19th Nov 2017
8:50pm
No different from the strugglers of my generation, OG. The difference is that the vast majority are living it up compared to moderately paid workers in my generation. There will always be disadvantaged, sadly, but life is a hell of a lot easier and more luxurious for the young now than when I started out.
Rainey
21st Nov 2017
5:00pm
It's interesting, OG, how some people try to claim things are tougher now than they were - or that Baby Boomers had it easy. Just look around. Dog washes proliferate. Gardening services are booming. Coffee shops are always full. Young folk regularly sip bought coffee on their way to work or on arrival. No thermos for today's young folk! Manicure salons are everywhere. I never knew anyone who had a manicure and never saw any business offering them when I was young. There were THREE restaurants in a town of 23,000 people - one a dining room in a hotel frequented only by the well-to-do and two Greek cafes. Nobody bought ready made coffee! Nobody bought takeaway lunches either. We packed them! Leisure was a picnic, with a hamper prepared by Mum, and nothing as lavish as shaved ham or avocado. Fizzy drinks were consumed twice a year - Christmas and birthdays. Most women indulged in alcoholic drinks rarely, as a treat. Wine with dinner has now became a regular indulgence, but it used to be a rare indulgence.

These businesses providing all these luxury services wouldn't survive if people weren't spending on luxuries - luxuries that our generation couldn't dream of affording.

If the young are so hard up, how do these luxury-suppliers survive? The answer is that there are some who are very hard up, as there always was. But society today is much more prosperous than it was and the majority of the affluence is mainly being enjoyed by younger Australians. Some baby boomers had It easy. Some had it very tough indeed. It was never easy for everyone, but it is easier now than in the past. I don't necessarily think it will continue to be easier, and I think retirees are going to suffer more than younger Australians as things get tougher.
musicveg
21st Nov 2017
5:10pm
So true Rainey, so many people are getting paid well in their jobs and are living it up rather than saving for the future. An average middle class person now has two incomes, a boat, a holiday house, an investment property and holidays twice a year which include overseas jaunts as well. Plus the kids get everything, all the electronics they want (or need as they say). I grew up in the 1970's as a low to middle class person on my dad's one good paying wage which he worked hard for, but we only had one holiday a year at a beach 1 and half hour away in a rented caravan, if we were lucky we got a cheap house some years which we had to share with relo's.
Rainey
21st Nov 2017
9:42pm
My kids would relay to your comment, musicveg. I'm closer to your dad's age, probably. We had a horrendous struggle for 25 years. Holidays were spent painting and renovating out home. We had one week in a tent an hour from home. Went to restaurants twice in 25 years.

My kids and all their friends own investment properties, bought before they turned 40. They have no hesitation eating out weekly. In fact, they think it's ''necessary''. They holiday overseas. They have two near SUVs, professionally landscaped yards maintained by paid gardeners, have cleaners in monthly, and have swimming pools that are maintained by professionals. Their kids have every gadget known to man and pocket money that makes my eyes water. 9 year-old lost $50 and shrugged it off saying he had heaps more and it really wasn't a big deal!

I know there are young folk doing it tough, but not nearly as the strugglers of my generation. And the affluence among the majority is astonishing. I hope, for their sake, it lasts, but it's not looking good!
Jim D
16th Nov 2017
1:59pm
More money for pensioners, means 2 things (1) the money has to come from money allocated, now and in the future, to other causes or (2) the money has to come from raised taxes.

Politicians will do neither, because both actions will lose them overall votes at election time.
Nan Norma
16th Nov 2017
2:23pm
Maybe the politicians should give up some of their ridiculous pay and pensions. We want everyone to be paid a fair wage but what some people are paid, CEO's for instance, is obscene.
Rae
16th Nov 2017
2:25pm
Does that apply now we have a totally fiat system with no gold standard?

I'd think the government could support the real economy by raising welfare payments rather than tax cuts. The money will still end up in the businesses but at least with welfare payment rises people will benefit as well.
Raphael
16th Nov 2017
2:43pm
Yes Rae -more money for pokies and cruises
Old Geezer
16th Nov 2017
2:50pm
Even if you cut pollies pensions in half those on welfare might get about a cent each out of it.
Nan Norma
16th Nov 2017
4:20pm
Pensions are not welfare.
Old Geezer
16th Nov 2017
4:28pm
All government pensions including old age pension are welfare as they are paid to those who have no other means of support. Old age Pension should be correctly called Seniors Welfare Payment as that is what it is.
TREBOR
16th Nov 2017
4:48pm
Not really the issue, OG - it's called (rooollling thunder)........ leadership.... something sadly lacking in our 'leaders' of today.

And you know already Pension is bought and paid for and is a Right.
Jim D
16th Nov 2017
7:44pm
Yes, getting a pension is a legal right just like gay marriage will "now" be a legal right in the very near future. Having such legal rights is very important in a free country, because that's the difference between a free country and a traditional religious theocracy (which was all the world "mostly" had until very recent centuries).

Yes, the legal right to an age pension, the legal right for women to vote, the legal right to be free from slavery, the legal right to not be religious, the legal right to divorce, the legal right to use contraception. the legal right to gay marriage (not just hetero marriage) ....... the list of legal rights we have is near endless. We are VERY lucky that we live in the modern era.

So while we may complain about the amount of pension that age pensioners get, at least we have the legal right to a pension.
Triss
16th Nov 2017
7:49pm
Pension envy again, OG
According to the Human Rights Commission the pension is a right.
TREBOR
16th Nov 2017
8:04pm
There is no right to marry Jim, and it is not a legal issue.... it is/was/will remain a matter of allowing a group to participate in something they have self-excluded from, purely because they demand it.

Now leave your SSM for now - this is another issue of real importance and value to the community as a whole.
Jim D
17th Nov 2017
12:21pm
Trebor, quit banging on constantly about your ideological "belief" that people have no right to get married.

This topic is about age pensioners. City rents are way too high for city pensioners who don't own a home. These pensioners need far greater rent assistance than they currently get.
Bonny
19th Nov 2017
10:22am
The is no legal right to welfare as you have to have prove you have no other means of support. The government decides who gets it and who doesn't.
Rainey
21st Nov 2017
9:34pm
Legal rights are irrelevant, Bonny. The laws are made by corrupt, dishonest, self-interested people to suit corrupt, dishonest, self-interested people. What matters is morals and ethics, and morals and ethics dictate that the aged pension IS A RIGHT. No amount of disgusting lawmaking by corrupt, dishonest, self-interested people - and no amount of endorsing by the self-interested privileged - can change that.

16th Nov 2017
2:43pm
Because of medical and other needs, I'm compelled to live in Sydney on a Disability Support Pension. I'm also forced to rent... In general, due to greed and demand arising from immigration as well as Chinese investors, Sydney rental prices are ridiculously high.

There's nowhere near enough affordable public housing.
Old Geezer
16th Nov 2017
2:48pm
Way too many empty houses and units today especially in Sydney and Melbourne.
Anonymous
16th Nov 2017
3:00pm
Yep - owned by Chinese in China. That should be BANNED.
Triss
16th Nov 2017
3:18pm
Everywhere, OG. In fact the government and councils should be able to use accommodation that is empty due to overseas owners. The problem of empty houses and units is now so bad that we must stop overseas buying of Australian housing. If we did that maybe prices would come down and more people would be able to afford their own homes.
TREBOR
16th Nov 2017
8:02pm
Hmm - Triss - that is sounding dangerously close to some sort of Central European government ideal...

In order to remain a relatively free society with the clear possibility of actually improving on that foundation, we need to stay well clear of any concept of The State holding all power.

Propping up this artificial market by allowing offshore investors to come in and leave them empty - well - yes - cut out offshore investment.

You cannot buy property in Japan..... just saying... and the Japanese are our bosom buddies these days... you cannot outright buy a business in many Asian countries, but must have a local partner.....just saying..... these things need to work two ways or not at all.

WHY is this nation so terrified of saying NO? Are our 'political leadership' so weak and terrified of losing a vote or two that they cannot refuse anything - or are they so well-fed and so cosseted in their lifestyle that they simply don't begin to understand or care?
Jim D
17th Nov 2017
12:28pm
Triss, you nailed it. That suggestion would be part of an overall solution. The radical far right ideologues would rally against it, but those types are un-Australian and a just small minority of Australians.

We need to make accommodation cheaper and more available to non home owing pensioners.
Rae
17th Nov 2017
4:44pm
Why? TREBOR. Look up the New Guard. They became the IPA. This is exactly what fascism does.Especially capitalist fascism.

Jim B it is a very very powerful small minority indeed.

They brought down Lang and Whitlam for even thinking to help workers get ahead.

Only WW11 slowed the for a while.

They have sadly used the gay community as a distraction instigated by Howards word changes to the marriage act. This was deliberate.
KSS
16th Nov 2017
2:51pm
"The biggest group of Age Pensioners at 29 per cent were single homeowners who on average spent $450 a week on bare necessities. At 14 per cent of the retired population, single people who had to rent spent around $430 a week."

So more than twice as many single homeowners pay more than the 'renters' on basic necessities, yet most comments here refer only to renters. Seems if you own your home you become invisible. I have said before on this forum that single homeowners are at a disadvantage even without a mortgage. The cost of power and other utilities is NOT half that of a couple, homeowners must pay council rates and strata fees (those in apartments) which renters don't pay at all and can be higher than a rental. And don't forget maintenance costs that is another homeowner expense that renters don't have, along with the occasional outlay on say water heaters, ovens, plumbing etc none of which a reenter is responsible for. Many do not live in the 'family home' i.e. the three/four bedroom house with garden back and front, they live in modest one or two bedroom units so nothing to 'downsize' to. Yes they can sell up and move to a cheaper area, but then so can the renters!
Triss
16th Nov 2017
4:42pm
Yes, KSS, those points are always overlooked by the pensioner bashers.
Rae
17th Nov 2017
4:50pm
Agree. In fact renters can move more readily than a homeowner who has to sell and pay considerable costs to move.
Old Geezer
16th Nov 2017
2:51pm
Time for a tax on all those extra bedrooms that OAPs have that rarely if ever use. If you take in an elderly renter then no tax payable.
Triss
16th Nov 2017
3:25pm
Why stick your claws in OAPs, OG, why not suggest a tax on empty bedrooms of totally empty homes of overseas buyers? This pension envy you have really needs therapy.
Old Geezer
16th Nov 2017
3:48pm
No one should have empty bedrooms in their houses when there are people who are homeless.
Triss
16th Nov 2017
4:39pm
I agree up to a point, OG, except that it means the government can sit back in their padded seats and do nothing about the homeless because someone else has taken care of the problem.
TREBOR
16th Nov 2017
4:51pm
My spare bedrooms are in use, OG - they're on stand-by for visitors.... you need to build a little redundancy into your systems.. kinda like the Apollo missions....

By your reasoning, OG, there should be a tax on investment properties that sit idle at any time.....
Kathleen
16th Nov 2017
8:05pm
Rubbish OG! Downsizing from a normal family home to a tiny flat is not going to do much except make life more miserable for its occupants. My sister did that, still cost heaps, and affects quality of life.
Children and grandchildren visit their grandparents which is one of the few joys some of us have as we are not mobile.
We don’t go out or go on holidays but we do get visits from family who are able to stay which means they have accommodation provided.
People must be allowed to make choices. After all, it is supposed to be a free country where one can express themselves freely no matter how rubbish their views may be!
Old Geezer
17th Nov 2017
2:00pm
Now that's a very selfish attitude to have where you are putting your own needs above others so that they are homeless.
Kathleen
17th Nov 2017
11:28pm
OG
Really, you are saying I am responsible for homelessness.
What a joke!
Sometimes my children are homeless whether by marriage break up or between rented flats. We have room to put them up and others in need.
I don’t own a mansion, just a normal house with a spare room or so and with family interstate, two of them being our children, it is needed.
We have a big family.
Bonny
19th Nov 2017
10:24am
I agree with OG far too many people have room to house others but fail to do so. I house two people myself on my estate who pay no rent but are willing to help out if needed.
ex PS
19th Nov 2017
10:57am
So, the government gets to decide how people manage the rooms in their own house, just another form of Communism.
Actually I think it is how they managed accommodation in communist Europe for decades.
Fortunately for me my house only has one bedroom and six extra reception rooms, it's just that three of those reception rooms happen to have beds in them.
ex PS
20th Nov 2017
8:24am
Old Geezer, no one should have money in their bank account or invested in the market, when there are people out there who don't have enough to eat.
Maybe the government should review every ones finances and see who is hoarding money they don't need.
Rainey
20th Nov 2017
8:33am
What a good idea, ex PS! Let's embrace the communist edict - only do it right! Take everything from the rich and distribute to the have nots. I'm sure Bonny and OG would love that! They are always ranting about people getting too much and having too much. Seems to me they have way too much, since they clearly don't understand what it means to have just enough or not enough. It should be taken from them and given to folk who need it more.

Oh, sorry Bonny and OG! Of course you meant that only OTHER PEOPLE - people YOU select to condemn - should give up what they have and what they enjoy. You are obvious exempt! Typical privileged mentality. Just like the pollies!
ex PS
20th Nov 2017
9:14am
Yes Rainey, I am often amused at how capitalists will often condemn socialist ideas until it suits them to take them up.
It does help sort out the theorists from the achievers though. Nobody who has worked hard and achieved the good things in life would be so cavalier about having a government interfere in the management of those assets.
I have had much more piece of mind since I have put the comments of such people in their rightful place, filed away in the realms of fantasy.
I am gratified that the correct amount of sarcasm showed through my comment, it is sometimes difficult to get that particular emotion across in the written word.
Old Geezer
21st Nov 2017
9:46pm
So ex PS I'll put you down to house 3 homeless people in your receptions rooms then. I don't have any spare beds in my place as it's full up here at present with homeless people.
Rainey
22nd Nov 2017
10:06am
Last week you didn't have a house, OG. You tell so many lies you can't remember them all and you keep contradicting yourself. Housing homeless folk? Yeah, right! And you support a welfare card that will be the final straw that will break the very people you PRETEND to be helping - the straw that will ensure they have NO HOPE of ever improving their situation. How does anyone save for a rental bond and moving costs on a welfare card? Can't have folk ''hoarding'' money, can we OG! They MIGHT actually save enough to find decent long-term accommodation.
ex PS
22nd Nov 2017
12:00pm
Not that easy O.G, you stipulated spare bedrooms, just because there is a bed in a room does not make it a bedroom, you really need to be more careful with your specifications. Are you sharing the money you aren't using with your homeless people?
And by the way, there are no homeless people in your house, you have provided them with a home, so they don't qualify.
Anyway time for me to mount my flying Unicorn and fly over the horizon, farting gold dust, crapping diamonds and urinating single malt as we go.
I must give you credit, you do tell a good story.
Jacqui
16th Nov 2017
2:57pm
Our government gives away millions to Indonesia etc. Our country allows the 3rd world
to live off our generous welfare system, from 'cradle to grave'. Most of the so called refugees will never work and rely on the welfare paid by our tax paying citizens.
Our government gave aprox. 88 million to the 'Clinton Foundation' what for?
Think about this when you next vote.
Anonymous
16th Nov 2017
3:03pm
And refugees get given housing ahead of Australians in need. That is WRONG.
Triss
16th Nov 2017
3:29pm
You’re right, Jacqui, our governments don’t spend our tax money wisely or with any kind financial intelligence.
Old Geezer
16th Nov 2017
3:17pm
Many years ago there was a lady who used to sleep on the seats on a railway station in Sydney. Every so often they would take here away and give her a bath and clean clothes. She had a terrible cough and would talk to no one. The sad thing was when she died the church was over flowing with people at her funeral. Everyone knew her but no one really knew who she was. Everyone simply knew her as "Lucy" from memory.
Fairness
16th Nov 2017
3:45pm
Amazing......governments are aware of these situations but opt to ignore until given publicity in press...Bet their salary increases have continued and will continue.....
Old Geezer
16th Nov 2017
4:19pm
They are aware of these situations but don't worry about them until the press puts the heat under them.
Triss
16th Nov 2017
4:35pm
Pollies pensions will rise and rise, Fairness, because that's the way government has arranged it. Making pensioners work until 70 will save the government
$3.6 billion in four years, that will pay the politicians' pensions for another few years.
TREBOR
16th Nov 2017
4:42pm
A sad reflection on the way this society has gone under... under the governance of greed.
Raphael
16th Nov 2017
4:54pm
The homeless are out on the street due mental health issues, not because they can't pay rent.
Mission Australia's report is BS
Tib
16th Nov 2017
5:34pm
You're right Raphael for male homelessness which is the majority of homeless people. But I think this story is just a rehash of the previous story which was only looking at homeless women. Women most likely end up homeless when their working drone dies (husband) and they can't manage their money.
Raphael
16th Nov 2017
5:44pm
Well why doesnt Missin Australia get them into shared apartments

$100 a week each - plenty of left over after rent assistance to live in luxury, or can't these women manage even that ?

I think these ones were on welfare anyways, probably had 6 kids from 12 different partners
Nan Norma
16th Nov 2017
5:52pm
Tib. That is such a rude remark to make. Why do men think that because they went out to paid work women working at home bringing up a family with no pay, did nothing. I'm a far better money manger than my husband ever was.
Tib
16th Nov 2017
6:28pm
NAn don't care just because you bought stappy sandles on sale doesn't make you a money manager.
Tib
16th Nov 2017
6:32pm
Raphael these women probably can't manage whatever you give them. Let's be honest most women would be on welfare without their husbands.
Triss
16th Nov 2017
7:58pm
’Mysogynists are us’ raising its head again, Tib and Raphael.
TREBOR
16th Nov 2017
8:11pm
Manophobes...... a nasty breed....

This issue is about homelessness - the reality is that street homeless men - and I've posted for you before the definitions of homelessness - vastly out-number women.

So let's discuss homelessness as a hole (and a whole), rather than stick with the old ladie's plight... and Jimbo's SSM obsession, which has no part here.

We need not turn discussion of homelessness into another Gender War.... Jayzuz - there are two book series in the meat grinder at Trebor Publishing Inc ... Fem War I and Fem War II....

How many Gender Wars can one man take? 64? (LMAO)....
Sundays
16th Nov 2017
9:23pm
Tib and Raphael can’t be real people! Scant regard for their fellow humans. It wouldn’t take much for someone living week to week to be homeless. Have no family, get sick, lose everything. What is s needed is safe and secure housing for elderly renters. Governments are not trying. My widowed sister who has a 4 bedroom housing commission house, but with kids grown wants to move to an over 55 unit. Been waiting over a year for the swap yet there are families on the long waiting list for a house.
Tib
16th Nov 2017
9:31pm
Triss call us misogyanist all day long if you like it's just a word ranting femtards use when they hear what they don't like. The truth. If your unhappy.... my job is done. :)
Rainey
22nd Nov 2017
10:02am
In NSW, people in public housing were granted a lifetime unconditional occupancy right. Now there are millionaires living in public housing while the waiting lists grow and grow and grow. How idiotic is that? (Yes, millionaires! I know one personally who inherited a million after bludging on benefits, PRETENDING to be disabled, for well over 2 decades. Still living in public housing.)
ex PS
22nd Nov 2017
12:08pm
I would guess that in most households that are of our generation it was the woman who took charge of the pay packet each week and managed the family budget. That is what happened in my house, simply because my wife had more time to do such things as she did not choose to work full time.
I think the notion of women being any worse at managing money than men is a myth that some men with low self esteem would like to be true.
You can not build yourself up by putting others down, it only shows up your own weakness. Don't tell me how bad someone else is, show me how good you are.
floss
16th Nov 2017
6:35pm
O.G your 3.45pm comment is spot on now if our dumb Pollies could take note.
TREBOR
16th Nov 2017
8:12pm
We have OG in training - he's coming along slowly but has relapses....
Rainey
20th Nov 2017
8:38am
Glad you see improvement, Trebor. Obviously I'm missing something!
Foxy
16th Nov 2017
8:38pm
Ahhhhhh - so wonderful to pop in here now and then - to read all the "know-alls" rubbish statements about crap they have never ever experienced in their "cotton wool ball and pathetically sheltered" lives!

So where should/could I choose to live???? Hmmmmm now let me see ......the recent AAMI advertisement had both to choose from .......

Should I choose "Woop Woop" - or perhaps "Ship Creek"? lol lol lol .......
Foxy
16th Nov 2017
8:43pm
BTW - I should add - I have worked with homeless and displaced people for many years in my life .....half the people who have made these disgusting comments are so very very wrong..........and the male comments regarding women are outrageous!!

Should be ashamed of yourselves....................
TREBOR
16th Nov 2017
8:50pm
I am absolutely struck speechless by your assumptions and generalisations, along with your utter lack of qualification for any of your knife points.... not to mention your rambling .....

Nobody really knows what point you are trying to make - which leaves us with the proposition that you are making comments merely to stir people up. Who are these 'know-alls' etc?

I see a few...... but a know-all is in the eye of the beholder..... be advised.
Raphael
16th Nov 2017
8:50pm
Agreee Foxy
Triss and Trebor should be ashamed of themselves
Foxy
16th Nov 2017
9:01pm
Trebor : "utter lack of qualification" - really? How do you know? See you have no idea whatsoever about me - yet it's you that makes ridiculous outlandish assumptions!!

Maybe I hit a sore point with some of your disgusting comments - yes? Think so!!

BTW - how can you be struck speechless? Thought all you could do is "MEOW"? lol lol lol
TREBOR
16th Nov 2017
9:20pm
Ah - your understanding of the English language is flawed... 'qualification' in that sense means qualifying your statements and not just making broad and un-focused comments. Your response is exactly that.... unqualified and assumptive.....

WHY should I be ashamed, Rafe? Not a good reader, are you - I said we should not allow this discussion to descend into another gender war... where were you?
Raphael
16th Nov 2017
9:46pm
Oops Trebor - I’m so used to you being wrong with your left wing posts I misread

My apologies
TREBOR
16th Nov 2017
9:58pm
Never been wrong yet, Rafe.... and I hold no ideological stance but am a fair observer of realities.
Rainey
20th Nov 2017
8:38am
Pot calling kettle black, Raphael. Your extreme right wing BS is ALWAYS wrong.
ray from Bondi
16th Nov 2017
9:47pm
Thye do but the biggest con job was when the labore government increased the single pension many years ago, where did the money come from they reduced the married pension before the second person received 2/3 of a full pension now it is 1/2. sadly I see that happening again as they refuse to make big business pay up the taxes they owe so there are not many options.
TREBOR
16th Nov 2017
10:10pm
Beware of freaks bearing Grift......
Justsane
17th Nov 2017
3:23pm
Ray,
Both members of a couple receive the same amount of pension. It is NOT 2/3 of a full pension for the first person and 1/2 for the second. The single pension is 2/3 of the combined amount of both recipients of a couple's pension.
vinradio
16th Nov 2017
11:14pm
I was lucky, when I went on the age pension I originally was sharing a private rental with my son, but lasT year he wanted to move in with a schoolfriend.I had done my research a few years earlier, and found an organisation which provides units for aged pensioners, where the rent is tied to the pension, so it should always be affordable, and they also expect you to claim rent assistance. They offered me a unit last year, I moved in in October, to a fully re-furbished unit, with all new appliances, freshly painted, with reverse cycle a/c, and I only pay for electricity, they pay for water and it is very affordable, and I really like it. Takes me 5 minutes to walk to a decent shopping centre, and has bus services which can take me further afield or into town if necessary. Otherwise it would have been impossible to find anything I could afford to rent privately on the age pension.
Rae
17th Nov 2017
5:08pm
That is great. My dad was in a similar situation in a country town.

When we moved him closer to us he paid $288 for a nice two bedroom unit not far from town.

Sydney and Melbourne are unaffordable now for low income earners.
BillF2
17th Nov 2017
1:04am
The cost and affordability of everything is related to the cost of land, whether it be for business or housing. It is the elephant in the room, unseen or ignored by most people, but nourished by governments and land developers who work symbiotically to screw as much revenue/profit out of the average punter. Who has ever seen a poor land developer? The price of land is determined initially by governments; cheap rural land in potential new housing areas is purchased by developers; and developed land prices are pushed regularly higher by real estate companies (based on comparing them with neighbouring properties). Land prices often exceed the cost of the buildings on them. The result is that many people cannot afford to buy a house, and those that do, have phenomenal mortgages and are in bondage for the rest of their lives. Those who have properties for rent will obviously charge as high a price as is sustainable, even if they get relief through negative gearing.
There is no concern for one's fellow countryman. There is no concern for low wage or pensioner renters. There is no understanding of what is actually happening. It is all pure unadulterated, legislated greed.
Any solution that does not include a reduction in the cost of land, and valuation reflective of its intrinsic worth, will never succeed. As state governments are the initial cause of the problem, they need to be held to account, and persuaded to make land available to all at a fair and reasonable cost, not just themselves or their mates. Unfortunately, self-interest and lack of integrity will prevent our pollies from doing the right thing by their fellow Australians.
SuziJ
17th Nov 2017
8:34am
Where are Mission Australia obtaining the data from? Certainly not here in the Rural City regions! I comfortably live in a 2 bedroom unit in the Albury/Lavington region. My private rent is currently $150 pw, rising to $155 pw at the end of December. I've been in this unit for nearly 12 months now, and there's no pressure to leave and find another property, so I'm happy. There are some properties in the same complex that are up for rent at $160 pw, but I think they're over priced, and may need to come down to $155 pw just to get tenants into them. They've been on the market for around 3 months now.
SuziJ
17th Nov 2017
8:46am
P.S. I moved from Canberra in 2010, where the weekly rental for a 3 bedroom townhouse in Gordon was $365 pw, to a 2 bedroom unit here for $155 pw. Most rentals have increased marginally, but some have remained steady for quite some time now.

There's no reason to be up in arms about the cost of rentals in the City if you're not prepared to be proactive and move to a place that has more affordable rents and, sometimes, better local facilities than some cities, which are bulging at the seams.

OK, the public transport may not be 24/7, but there are buses close by which run 5 1/2 days a week, so a car, or someone to drive you would be advisable.

There are plenty of Retirement Villages here, too.
Blossom
16th Dec 2017
7:50pm
SuziJ, Have you researched Retirement Villages?? The majority of them you.... pay a lump sum..... to get a "License to Occupy" a Unit. When you vacate the village you get a % back. It is renovated and "re-sold" to another person. You don't sell it yourself. The advantage of them is you don't pay council or water rates. They maintain the front gardens and communal areas, street lighting, maintenance of your unit - most things are free.
You pay a maintenance fee - some places your pay monthly, others fortnightly to cover the costs of what they pay for - Govt charges, electricity for street lighting and community halls / clubhouses. Cleaning of those buildings. The staff have to be paid wages, there is other general admin costs.
MD
17th Nov 2017
9:52am
I'm surprised, nobody has yet mentioned the Nazis 'Final Solution'.

"By 2011 the shortfall of 271,000 dwellings....", current calls for "60,000 extra ....dwellings ... for older people".
Go ahead, build em, the govt (should) of course and then what - the factor of 'X' (existing value) thousands of homeless oldies would overnight, like proverbial mushrooms, pop up out of the ground and in all probability could potentially double.
How many existing PH (pub houses) of multiple bedrooms are currently occupied by single welfare recipients ? Could these spare rooms be brought to bear as a means of alleviating this problem ?
Vacant rooms "available for visiting children/grandchildren" smacks of bloody-mindedness in light of the varying degree of support some folk presently realize.
"Cannot/does not" - want PH accommodation anywhere else but at a chosen location simply will not wash if occupants are TOTALLY reliant on public goodwill. Those unfortunate enough to be suffering ailments/medical problems enjoy the added benefit of a publicly funded health system, already burdened and straining to cope!
Perhaps all the self professed know-alls herein (authors included) would like to explain who it is that they expect to determine what constitutes equity and fairness relative to PH housing allocation - courtesy of public goodwill. I doubt we can begin to imagine the lamentations of both existing and prospective resident bleedin hearts.

Could it be that this issue is similar to that of the LGBTIQ brigade, in that most everyone wants/expects something - predominately at the expense of others - ON THEIR OWN TERMS?
That the existing housing problem is set to grow is undisputed and the means to redress this will be an ongoing headache for govt. As it seems apparent that most folk expect govt to wave the magic wand to assist pumpkin production then perhaps this requires another govt committee of inquiry (whether or not we agree) that calls for submissions from every relevant facet of society, and, regardless of findings/outcomes that committee recommendations be adopted in the context of a social contract.
For those that think they've got problems now ...... !

Now I defy you to tell me I've got it wrong and have in effect just tripped myself up.
Rae
17th Nov 2017
5:16pm
Plenty of pensioners might like a hundred dollars and someone to share expenses if it was organised.

Air B&B is possible but not accommodation for the needy?
Rainey
18th Nov 2017
8:31am
''Vacant rooms "available for visiting children/grandchildren" smacks of bloody-mindedness''

Sorry, folks, but my partner and I worked our guts out for 50+ years to enjoy little luxuries like this in our later years. Why should those who work hard and save constantly be stripped of the benefits they earned to hand out to others? Many of these renters who are in danger of becoming homeless wasted their money or bludged their way through life.

I would be happy to give to support those who've had a really tough run, and there ARE many of them. (I've been supporting them for a lifetime through taxation!) But I'm sick and tired of being deprived to hand out to people who were just irresponsible.

I lost part of my fair and equitable inheritance because another heir wasn't satisfied with her lot, claiming ''need'' after bludging on the system for 45 years and never working. Now you want me to give up the spare rooms I need for my visiting grandchildren so other bludgers and irresponsibles can have the home they SHOULD have worked to acquire?

If we keep denying people the right to enjoy the fruits of their labour, we will keep adding to the number of bludgers and cheats. It's been happening for a while now. The latest seems to be ''don't punish poor disadvantaged children for crime''.

I am a strong advocate for the genuinely disadvantaged. I work with them, and I see the horrendous challenges they face, the unfairness of the system, and the absolute cruelty of the more advantaged who love to blame the victims for their situation. But we have far too many who are victims of their own irresponsible behaviour, and depriving the more responsible of their fair and equitable rewards for their hard work is never going to help fix things.

BTW. The other heir I mentioned had no trouble sorting out her homeless problem. Took my share of the estate through gross deception and abuse of court process, built a lavish home, then brought in a ''carer'' she didn't need (because she's fit and healthy - though on ''disability'' benefits claiming to be crippled) who promptly claimed a carer pension and pays more than half the expenses.

The system needs urgent reform. And the FIRST objective should be to stop punishing responsible behaviour and depriving those who work and save of the benefits they earned.
Old Geezer
18th Nov 2017
7:34pm
MD you got it exactly right. Too many people today think they are owed a living for just being alive. They will do what ever it takes to discredit the wealthy so they can get a share of their wealth. No wonder business owners today as penniless bums.
Rainey
19th Nov 2017
8:45pm
The well-off think they are owed everything, and they take, take, take and take some more. The battlers work their guts out for bugger all and cop nothing but blame and abuse from stinking selfish egomaniacs. The wealthy MUST be discredited, because if they are allowed to continue their plundering, society will collapse. We are already at a point whee a handful own more wealth than 95% combined. And that handful (5 actually) still are not satisfied!
Raphael
17th Nov 2017
5:43pm
Well said SuziJ and Vinradio.just goes to show people who are complaining really have no clue how to live within their means .
No matter how much you give them it will never be enough . And those supporting their call are going so in the hope that they will get bigger pensions
Just greed
Knows-a-lot
19th Nov 2017
12:27pm
Sometimes the "means" is simply insufficient financially to live - particularly with the cost of living outstripping real income growth. Bloated rents are a huge factor in this.
Rainey
17th Nov 2017
7:01pm
When the Govt approved the assets test changes, it secured the support of the Greens by undertaking to do a full review of the aged pension system. Never happened! Yet another FRAUD by a dishonest and negligent mob of useless turds. Such review is LONG OVERDUE and DESPERATELY NEEDED. There are far too many inconsistencies and far too much unfairness in a complicated system that makes an administrative nightmare (and must cost a fortune to oversee!)

Maybe a proper review would highlight areas where savings can be redirected to providing more help for those who are struggling to keep a roof over their heads? But don't hold your breath for any of the jerks in power to recognize the problem, let alone to think of any kind of innovative solution. They seem only to know how to recycle old ideas, without even considering whether they are appropriate to the current environment or bothering to analyse the potential adverse consequences.
George
17th Nov 2017
11:17pm
I agree, there is no hope from the current mob of Liberals / Nats, Labor & Greens for any real solution or even the review which was promised. Pester your MPs of course, but don't expect results.

People need to understand this seriously and vote out all sitting MPs of the above parties by putting them last in preferences. (I don't care who you put 1st, 2nd, etc - your choice whoever you find sensible.) Only then they may wake up!
Old Geezer
19th Nov 2017
4:55pm
Yes it's time to move to all those on welfare using a welfare card so it can be used for what it is intended to be for instead of putting money in bank accounts where no control exists.
Rainey
19th Nov 2017
8:42pm
You are like a badly broken record, OG. Can't see past your own nose! Just persecute good people and you think that will solve problems. Fool! That's what's put us in this mess. Bullying people to give up trying and just decide to rort the stinking system, because everyone else does and there are no rewards anymore for honesty, integrity, or responsible conduct.

Get over your vile attitude, OG. Learn to THINK beyond the simplistic BS that is stuffing up our entire world. Or are you too tunnel visioned to even notice that the rich are pillaging and plundering, and - like you - desperate to find a way to blame the less privileged for the problems the stinking greedy rich have created.
Old Geezer
21st Nov 2017
9:39pm
Heard all that before Rainey when they wanted to do away with cheques and put welfare into bank accounts. History is repeating itself again. Get over it as it's going to happen and the sooner the better for us all.
musicveg
21st Nov 2017
10:54pm
How can it be better for everyone, welfare gets spent into the system no matter what it is spent on, no one is hoarding their money. The card could be limiting for a lot of people, and it might dictate what supermarket you can go to or where you can buy your food, for example how are you going to go at a farmers market.
Rainey
22nd Nov 2017
9:57am
You would have to be a shallow, bigoted fool to think that people on welfare are hoarding their money! The cheats are. The manipulators are. And the system creates cheats and manipulators. And the answer is NOT to persecute hundreds of thousands of genuinely needy and line the coffers of a stinkingly greedy company, pushing the overall cost of welfare sky high. The solution is to reform the system so that it works as it should and treats people with respect.

The welfare card is a disaster. It is destroying lives and families and driving major increased hardship. It is stopping people from getting off welfare. It's keeping them down - which is precisely what the vile privileged want. If we want more poverty, crime, mental illness, family breakdown, messed up children, addiction, etc. then YES, let's bring on the welfare card. Because that's what it will deliver - in spades. It will punish and hurt anyone who has a brain and is striving responsibly to move out of welfare, and it will ensure that the filthy stinking privileged can turn up their twisted noses at a lot more people. Hopefully it will do enough harm to drive a revolution or a crime wave that will kick the stinking privileged where it hurts. People typically only take so much before they rise up. The welfare card might just be the final straw.
Old Geezer
22nd Nov 2017
11:52am
Rainey those exact arguments were used when they started putting welfare into bank accounts. No final straws there.
musicveg
19th Nov 2017
3:13pm
Haven't we done this story just recently? Rehashing again. I think the rent situation depends on where you live, what your needs are, whether you want to be close to family etc. Public housing needs a rehash, too many have had their houses for too long and maybe don't even need them anymore. What about the story on current affair recently when the long term caravaners where kicked out for developer, this is happening a lot lately. Cheaper rental properties are being bought up and renovated all the time, and many houses are empty most of the year if not all the time. We need more options like at tiny house village on crown land. The government could provide land for those who own caravans for example. I am saving up for one now, just in case my rent goes up past what I can afford, I have the same rental for over 10 years but have never felt more worried because the city folk are moving in our country town and rentals are getting harder to find.
Blossom
16th Dec 2017
7:10pm
One problem sometimes is that in country areas there is no medical services which are often needed by the elderly.
In SA there is a group called Unity Housing that builds houses etc. exclusively for low income earners. Some of them are definitely in country areas There is an office in Adelaide and in some big country towns who have lists of homes in small country towns


Join YOURLifeChoices, it’s free

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