10th May 2018

Federal Budget 2018: Government fails renting pensioners

FONT SIZE: A+ A-
‘Budget fails 12% of pensioners’
Olga Galacho

Think tank Per Capita has poured scorn on what it calls the “systemic failure” of the Federal Government to help pensioners who rent, saying that Budget 2018 ignores their financial plight.

The group’s Executive Director, Emma Dawson, has called on the Government to immediately increase by 25 per cent the Rent Assistance for pensioners.

Currently, the maximum fortnightly Rent Assistance payment for a single person is $134.80 and $127 each for members of a couple.

In Sydney, the average rental property costs $480 a week and a recent study by Anglicare Australia found that of 67,300 properties listed for rent, fewer than 700 were deemed affordable for Australians on a variety of pensions.



With only three in four of Australia’s 3.6 million retirees owning their home, there are hundreds of thousands of seniors in the rental market.

In an exclusive interview last month, the Minister for Revenue and Financial Services, Kelly O’Dwyer, told YourLifeChoices that 12 per cent of all Age Pensioners rent.

“As at June 2017, there were 300,681 individuals and families aged 65 years or over who receive Rent Assistance,” the Minister said.

Ms O’Dwyer also revealed that a third of assistance recipients have to pay more than 30 per cent of their income on housing.

In YourLifeChoices’ latest Retirement Affordability Index (March 2018), Australia Institute economist Matt Grudnoff revealed that renting pensioners were the hardest hit by a rise in housing costs in the past year.

“A … price increase that continued to climb at a steady but relentless pace was housing. However, by far the biggest impact was on Cash-Strapped Singles. This tribe felt a massive 0.8 per cent increase for the year – the largest for any tribe,” Mr Grudnoff said.

Cash-Strapped Couples were the next to feel the biggest sting in housing costs, weathering a hike of 0.6 per cent.

“These people are doing it tough and we cannot understand why the Government has ignored them in this Budget,” Ms Dawson told YourLifeChoices.

She added that increasingly, it was older women who were being left to struggle to put a roof over their heads.

“Women are much more likely to face poverty after a divorce because they do not have big balances in their super.

“Even if they are left with the house after a split, they sometimes will have to sell it to pay their bills and then begins the downward spiral into poverty when the money runs out.

“It is not right that people should feel very insecure about their housing in old age,” Ms Dawson said.

Public policy outfit the Centre for Independent Studies (CIS) also believes Rent Assistance needs to increase, especially for Australians living in major cities.

“Our research shows that than on average, retired homeowners have about $700,000 worth of wealth tied up in their homes and another $100,000 in other assets,” said CIS research manager Simon Cowan.

“But retirees who rent on average have just $15,000 to their name,” he told YourLifeChoices.

“It seems incongruous that we are giving more assistance to someone lucky enough to own their home, because it is not counted in the means test for the Age Pension.

“This system causes some fairly unequal outcomes for older Australians.”

Mr Cowan said Rent Assistance calculations need to take into account where people live, because in some cities rents are very high compared to certain regional areas.

“The current level of assistance doesn’t reflect the housing costs in Sydney. You could be living in a small town in Tasmania where rents are a fraction of those in the major capital cities, and yet you are entitled to the same maximum payment.

“You do need to cap Rent Assistance to stop people exploiting it, but the cap at the moment is lower than it should be,” he said.

Do you struggle to pay your rent? By how much do you think the Government needs to increase Rent Assistance.


Related articles:





COMMENTS

To make a comment, please register or login
mike
10th May 2018
10:23am
I am still waiting for my pensionner Concession card that Liar Turnbull promised to return to all those who lost it due to Bastard Hockey's changes to the assets test penalising all those who worked and saved for their retirement. Those who had More than $813000 on 1/1/2017 had it reinstated, but those who had LESS than $813000 and lost it a few days/weeks/months later did not. Consider this response from Mr Andrew Gee MP. The reinstatement of the PCC was intended to alleviate the shock of pensioners losing their pension and the PCC and the resulting loss of financial security. Yes, but what about those who had Less than $813000 and subsequently lost it a few days later. I now support One nation. I cant tolerate Turnbulls lies any longer
George
10th May 2018
1:22pm
Should never have listened to his lies in the first place, and all those who voted for him last time are responsible for the current situation!
OnlyGenuineRainey
15th May 2018
11:05am
I wish I could believe One Nation was any better, but they are supporting tax cuts for big business and appear to be well and truly in bed with the LNP. Good luck, Mike. You'll need it whoever is in power.
Grateful
10th May 2018
10:46am
The government is faced with a dilemma with rent assistance.
Rents have gone up primarily, and been generally accepted, by the sharp rise in the cost of that rental property.
That sharp cost has also clearly and been generally accepted, been caused primarily by the extraordinarily generous tax concessions for negatively geared properties.
The Coalition government denies this connection arguing against numerous independent assessments.
So, to increase rent assistance, the government would have to concede that the significant rise in the cost of rental properties has caused the consequent rise in rent which necessitates an increase in rent assistance. But that would trigger an almighty and very embarrassing fight from those who blame the government's failure to address negative gearing in any way.
So the government has taken the gutless way out by simply totally ignoring all representations regarding anything to do with the cost of housing in general and rentals in particular.
Hasbeen
10th May 2018
3:22pm
I can see no reason why our kids, struggling with raising kids while paying huge mortgage repayments themselves should have to subsidise life style choices for pensioners.

If pensioners wanted to retire in a capital city, they should have made the necessary arrangements like buying a house a long time ago. If you failed to do that, go live somewhere you can afford. you have no right to expect someone else to subsidise your lifestyle choice.

There are plenty of places where rents are affordable, even on the pension. I believe Jandowae is nice this time of year, & the rents are low.
inextratime
10th May 2018
9:16pm
Good on yer has been. Another case of I'm a smart ass so why aren't you. There are a thousand reasons why some people are not as well off as you but don't let that thort bubble get in the way of 'just move''. People have families and friends and a whole history of living in a city and to just up and leave and live in a place away from families and friends is not that easy. Believe it not some people have paid their due tax commitments during their life span and so lets not get carried away with subsidised life style choices. One of the reasons apart from negative gearing is the supply and demand of housing. Bring in 190,00 immigrants every year and not build enough homes and you have the perfect scenario for property increases, increases in property for which they have done absolutely nothing except pay a mortgage instead of rent !! The capital gains on property are obscene so don't go puffing the chest out vilifying people who were not able to jump on the property gravy train which you seem to be so proud of.
fearlessfly
10th May 2018
12:00pm
Well, hey, you did not expect this bunch of bast**ds to do anything for those on the Age Pension or Newstart did you ? Did you ? Just make damned sure you do NOT vote for the coalition in the upcoming election, and do NOT waste your vote on a minor party, that's just giving the farm back to the encumbent ass**les.
Jim
10th May 2018
1:06pm
So if you are not going to waste your vote on a minor party, does that mean you are going to vote for Bill Shorten? Shorten has already indicated how he he is going to help the pensioners, he backtracked very quickly when he realised he might lose a few votes, make no mistake with the aid of the greens he will he will reinstate his tax on the pensioners, that might not even be the worst decision Labor makes when it gets in power, he has already said he would increase the refugee intake in line with the greens policy, so a vote for Bill is the same as a vote for the greens, so in fact you will be voting for a minor party. In no way will Labor's policy assist pensioners that are struggling, neither party seems to have the answer, allowing thousands more refugee's into the country will only make the plight of pensioners who are renting even harder, there has to be a better way, governments should be proactive in supplying affordable housing for pensioners and others who are struggling, there is plenty of government land available, start building low cost housing, win win situation, plenty of job oppourtunities as well.
George
10th May 2018
1:24pm
Shorten won't help you - remember they refused to revert the Asset Test changes? It is better to vote AGAINST all current seat-warmers (Liberals, Labor and Greens in particular) by putting them LAST in preferences, and vote for any alternative who you prefer ideally one who can win.
Misty
10th May 2018
2:27pm
Whar rubbish you both write here , Jim and George, you know darn well it doesn't matter who you vote for in a minor party or Independant one of the major parties will always be the one who will get into power, and not voting at all makes no sense, just gets you a fine.
fearlessfly
10th May 2018
3:43pm
Like it or not, the only other party with enough seats to actually form a Government is Labour !
George
10th May 2018
4:53pm
Misty, it is fatalistic losers like you (presume you are a Labor stooge) who perpetuate that myth.
Enough people need to start voting for alternatives - I didn't pick who that will be as it depends on each seat who CAN win. Even if you want to vote for a major party, as long as that person is currently NOT on the seat, it is OK, as it will remove the current seat-warmer - we have to make them insecure to start listening to the people. And, not allow them to get their 8 years on the seat to access their fat, undeserved, untested pensions.
Jim
10th May 2018
5:45pm
Not sure which part of my comment you think is rubbish, I made no reference to not voting, the only relevent comment I made was if you vote Labor you are also voting for a minor party in the greens, which I certainly disagree with, perhaps you should read my comment again before you make silly statements. The last part of my comment regarding providing low cost housing can only be achieved by one of the major parties, but I can't see either of them doing it, can you?
MICK
10th May 2018
9:15pm
Jim - nonsense.
Shorten categorically stated in the Budget reply tonight that self funded retirees would not lose the dividend imputation credit.
Your attempt to claim he would do an Abbott when is just right wing BS. Retirees was NEVER his original target!
Jim
10th May 2018
10:01pm
Another response from the paid up member of the Labor party, don't you think it's about time you declared your interest, every time you make a comment you deride every one else's opinion, typical left wing bully, no matter what Shorten is saying now he will change his mind after the election if only to appease the greens, Shorten knew exactly who he was targeting, and if he didn't know who it was going to affect then is this the man you want running the country, he has proved he has no understanding of economics and has no idea who is going to be affected by his policies made on the run, as soon as it was pointed out to him that it could cost votes he soon backtracked, how could you possibly trust this man.
OnlyGenuineRainey
15th May 2018
11:10am
Mick, actually Shorten stated that retirees WERE his target, and he is certainly crippling self-funded retirees with limited means. His policy forces low income earners and low-asset-holding SFRs to pay the company tax, while the rich get it all back! Good one! And he did NOT say SFRs would no lose the imputation credit. He said super fund with at least one member receiving a pension before March 28 would retain their credits. The rest can apparently go to hell!

I have now asked the Greens to take this matter up at a high level in the hope that, in the absence of any response from the ALP, the Greens will see the wrong of it and pressure Shorten by threatening to oppose if he doesn't correct his wrongs. (And no, I'm NOT a Greens supporter. I just happen to know a few who are high up in the party.)
beyond caring
10th May 2018
12:34pm
Like many pensioners I still upset about the changes that resulted in a significant drop in our pension. won't and should not vote for either major party again. the recent changes to allow me to earn via paid work will help get back to where I was before losing some pension t.... but should I need to stay working until I drop?????????
indi
10th May 2018
1:26pm
consider a 25% rise in pension you will not have to think too hard on what the greedy landlords will do.$$$$$
George
10th May 2018
1:35pm
There we go again - a Think Tank who seeks to TARGET certain sections, or Tribes as YLC calls it, and demand benefits for certain sections. For example, the homeowners also were hit hard by steep rises in costs, and most pensioners were hit by the nasty Asset Test changes, and this article ignores them. This targeted way is the surest way to cause divisions, and sets off groups against each other. I know that's Labor's (defective) approach, but Divide-and-Rule is also used by Liberals and others as a means of confusing the electorate and getting their way - the pommies excelled at it for centuries! You WON"T get good change that way!

The best solution is to give Universal Pension to all simply based on Age (65) and Residency (of say 15 years), with NO other tests, and let all work hard to improve on that with additional income, downsize, etc, etc - in other words a solution which gives YOU all flexibility with no dependence on Centrelink or further Govt pension policy changes. Also, make Politicians equal to others, by removing their Special, Untested, Undeserved, Large Pensions. Now, which Political Party will offer this - anyone?
Misty
10th May 2018
2:29pm
So you are quite happy with giving millionaires a pension George?.
George
10th May 2018
4:59pm
They will get taxed on it at their marginal rates, and it will be negligible for them anyway. Also, in other countries many rich don't even apply for it anyway. So, no problem. Your envy clear has no limit, as you would rather have a disgusting unfair system as we have now which discourages savers, than allow one dollar to go to someone better off. If they worked harder than you and earned more wealth than you, they deserve it!
MICK
10th May 2018
9:17pm
Agree George. Most first world countries have one.

Misty - I see your point but it's not hard to legislate a ceiling above which the pension is not paid.
OnlyGenuineRainey
15th May 2018
11:33am
George, sadly both parties play on the envy of people like Misty, who can't think past ''I've got less so I'm more entitled''. Never occurs to them to consider that people who worked harder and/or went without more to save EARNED and DESERVE reward, and it's economically harmful to the entire society to deny them that reward. The country is in a mess because of too many handouts and too little personal responsibility and reward for effort. That's not to say we should ignore our obligations to the genuinely needy, but needs-based welfare drives need and manipulation to appear needy. We would have a far stronger economy if we adopted a universal pension.

And Misty, anyone who thinks a million is a lot of money for a recent retiree facing maybe 30+ years of inflation and rising health and care costs with $0 income is clearly not very smart. Pensioners receive around $2 million from the government over the course of their retirement. People who worked and saved have to live on HALF that! Goodness, no wonder we have budget problems! How many who could easily retire with $1 million have seen the light and opted for the $2 million handout instead?
OnlyGenuineRainey
10th May 2018
1:37pm
I cannot see how rewarding people for not buying a home helps the economy. I agree with providing basic accommodation for the genuinely needy, but rent assistance is too broad. Add the discrimination against home owners through the assets test and many would be better off NOT owning a home. We need to STOP this idiotic approach to welfare. It's not working for the genuinely needy and the cost is excessive because it kills incentive and punishes people who strive to be as independent as possible. The whole system is seriously flawed. A universal pension, combined with fair taxation, with a sensible approach to providing subsidized public housing for the genuinely needy, would cost far less and achieve far more.
MICK
10th May 2018
9:19pm
Of course you can OGR. If investors were not in the market then people would be living in tents and taxes would need to rise so that governments could again build housing for the millions.
The current problem is a lack of stock and the importation of people together with a lack of building to keep up for at least 2 decades.
Gee Whiz
10th May 2018
1:46pm
The greatest bunch of morons ever to hold office. They just can't do anything right.
PlanB
10th May 2018
3:03pm
Scott Morrison and the rest of those cronies are a lot of mongrels there was NOTHING in that budget for the least well off and the bloody HIDE giving a rise of &^%$^^$ $10.50 a week to low earners what an insult -- he is nothing but an arrogant elitist, would you believe of the age of 49 an absolute piece of scum!
vinradio
10th May 2018
3:09pm
Perhaps a strong program of building more housing, turning empty apartment or city buildings into cheap rentals for seniors and other low income people, and increasing rent assistance would help with employment and housing?
Jim
10th May 2018
5:48pm
Well said, far too many empty houses and units.
patti
10th May 2018
3:51pm
The only way currently to afford to rent on a pension is to live in a hovel, or to share. At my age I would not want to do that, unless a group of like-minded people in the same situation decided to pool their resources and access a big enough property for everyone to be accommodated. Would you like to move back with your kids?? Rental assistance needs to be lifted, and "OnlyGenuineRainey", it is hardly "rewarding" someone who could not afford to buy a home, not everyone can do this you know. We can't judge anyone unless we know their circumstances, and not even then, if we care at all
MICK
10th May 2018
9:21pm
I remember when I was young it was not different but maybe my recollection ain't what it used to be. It is tough though.
OnlyGenuineRainey
15th May 2018
11:41am
Patti, very few of today's retirees ''could not afford to buy a home''. Most current retirees had ample opportunity if they had bothered to prioritize and make a few sacrifices. If anyone ''couldn't afford a home'' it was me. But I bought one anyway, on a minimum wage with a disabled partner and a disabled child who cost a fortune for therapy and medical ''gap'' fees, and despite a lot of other challenges.

If I retired now, it would cost me over $500 a week to live in my own home.

No, rent assistance should NOT be lifted. It should be abolished. The pension should be increased and the assets test abolished. The genuinely disadvantaged should be offered public housing, but there should be NO rent assistance and NO reduction in pension because someone worked their guts out for 30+ years to pay off a home. This idea that home owners were somehow ''lucky'' is BS and the record needs to be set straight.

We need to get back to personal responsibility and reward for effort if this country is ever to recover from the economic doldrums. Rewarding people for ending up poor is stupid. Give adequate support where it is genuinely needed, but stop giving pension bonuses to people who drank, gambled, partied, or holidayed to blow their income and end up poor. And yes, I DO know the circumstances of many. And I WILL judge them. Because I'm sick of being disadvantaged to give them handouts after they fed a healthy income through the pokies.
Sundays
10th May 2018
4:03pm
The underlying argument in this article seems to be that people who are ‘lucky enough to own their own home’ are receiving more assistance because it is not counted in the Asset test. This implies that home ownership just happened which is s far cry from the truth for most. If you really don’t want people to feel insecure about housing in old age, build more public housing. Just increasing rent assistance is not a long term solution
George
10th May 2018
5:02pm
They love hand-outs because it makes them feel good!
OnlyGenuineRainey
15th May 2018
11:23am
Actually, many SFRs are finding it costs them over $500 a week to own a home and they would be far better off on a pension and rent assistance. They are eroding their savings merely to bridge the gap between their investment income and pension benefits, so their savings are worthless.

Add up rates, water costs, maintenance, insurance, no rent assistance, and the difference in pension eligibility between home owners and non-home owners, and you might as well not bother to waste 30+ years struggling to pay off a mortgage. It certainly doesn't pay!

Olga, can you please take up this inequity with the powers-that-be as well? I'm fed up with all this ''poor me, I'm paying high rent''. I can rent for 2/3rds of what it costs me to own my home in retirement AND get a subsidy. What the hell did I work so hard for?
willie
10th May 2018
6:47pm
you are trying to get rent assistance for pensioners who do not own their own home but ignor pensioners who do who have to pay rising local rates==water rates
MICK
10th May 2018
9:22pm
Hard to satisfy all and everybody wants more. Human nature.
Marian
10th May 2018
8:41pm
The system is never to be work the all law & Constitution have to be New the is not Constitution by Australian Citizence to be accept from day one the was not Australian Citizence by law at the time ???.The all Political system as we see the Judgments against The members is fake
Olga
10th May 2018
8:43pm
Hi Mike. It's Olga here. If you would like me to write something about the terrible inequity you have experienced I am keen. Please message me at olga@yourlifechoices.com. What has happened to you and thousands of others is unconscionable.
geordie
11th May 2018
3:19am
The ATO have everyone's records for their entire working life. Could someone not check each applicant to see if they've wasted a good wage or if they've never had a good wage. If a retiree has been below the poverty line then help them out a bit more than the bludger who has earned the money and spent it all, not planning for his/her/their future or retirement. I know of one man in his fifties who applied to get his 10 grand (everything) of his super to buy a car apparently for work.
One week and plenty of booze hotels and drugs later he was again penniless. Back on the government payroll. In this age of technology people should not be able to slip between the cracks.
Marian
11th May 2018
3:54am
The is not any system for the Australian Citizence the is not any rights the is not law The is not Constitution the is not Governments is end all generations & pensioners never to be life as human the all electorate system is fake
PlanB
11th May 2018
8:09am
And this scum Morrison wants to spend 50 Mill on some bloody statue to Captain Cook FGS!

What about spending that on something that will help something that MATTERS
GrayComputing
11th May 2018
9:39am
Dear PM MPs and senators

NO ASSET TEST FOR A PENSION EVERV AGAIN!

It is time for the government (and for all of us to rant at our PM ) to take action for human decency and a huge stress reduction for pensioners

NO ASSET TEST FOR A PENSION EVERV AGAIN!
A pension is not welfare.

For the retired and retiring people in your electorate do you think they really look forward and want 100++ visits to/from Centrelink and be part of 3 million waiting queues and lost calls?

Most economist say we will save taxpayers money by dropping asset testing because of the massive overheads cost in running Centrelink and the 10,000 conflicting rules
Even poorer New Zealand has a NO ASSET pension so it is cheaper and user friendly,

As an MP do you really like being part of the system that allows this indirect abuse of the elderly?

This abuse is actually sponsored by our government and forced down to Centrelink and borders on a criminal act.

Why do MPs normally compassionate persons let this Centrelink abuse happen at taxpayers’ expense?

As a MP you even stand to lose your chance at being part of the government unless all these criminal asset tests for a pension are dropped now.

NO ASSET TEST FOR A PENSION EVER AGAIN!
PlanB
11th May 2018
11:02am
Gray, why not send this to Turnbull and Morrison -- I have written yesterday and also rang -- the more complains they get the more they will know how EVERYONE feels
Adrianus
14th May 2018
8:42am
Why should Gina Rinehart and Harry Triguboff get welfare? I don't understand your logic?
Radish
15th May 2018
7:22am
Taken fromn 2016

Rinehart's company paid $466 million in tax. Overall, the ATO data showed those companies paid total tax of about $2 billion, plus $1.6 billion from associated entities. The biggest taxpayer among the large private companies was Gina Rinehart's Hancock Prospecting, which paid $466 million from $2.85 billion in revenue

Not to be sneezed at eh...all this goes towards helping those on pensions etc.

I am sure Ms Rhinehart would not take the pension if there was a Universal Pension (but she would be quite entitled to do so if there was no longer an assets or income test)

People would scream if she did get it though...wouldn't they ??
OnlyGenuineRainey
15th May 2018
11:18am
The current assets test makes SFRs worse off in income terms than pensioners, forcing them to draw down on savings until they become eligible for a pension. That is IDIOTIC. Also, the current test incentivizes manipulation to ensure you retire with less than $500,000, and that is IDIOTIC. Why would any sane government create policies that punish people for working and saving and reward them for retiring with less? It's a stupid policy.

And no, Gina would NOT be eligible for a pension if the assets test were abolished, because she would fail on her income. But if the pension were universal, she would qualify. I'm sure she would whoop with joy at receiving a miserable eight-hundred and something dollars a fortnight! And I'm sure it would break the budget having to pay it!

Add up all the admin savings by eliminating the means test for the OAP. Then add up all the massive benefits from not incentivizing retirees to buy expensive mansions, not incentivizing divesting of assets to qualify for a pension, added spending by retirees generating bigger business profits and tax revenue and job creation, and greater wealth among the younger generation as wealth is passed down. We would be FAR FAR FAR better off overall. The means test is short-term thinking imposing long-term loss.
KB
11th May 2018
10:33am
It is time the government capped how much landlords can charge on their rentals for pensioners. This might alleviate some pressure
OnlyGenuineRainey
15th May 2018
11:04am
So landlords are now expected to invest in order to offer charity to pensioners? Get real!
Jannie
11th May 2018
3:57pm
Have a look at Pauline's budget reply on facebook is very interesting. Members of the senate were lacking in the gallery they are so rude and should not be paid if they do not attend a sitting. Pauline is the only one that has the guts to stand up for us we all should be supporting her. I will not be voting for the major parties ever again they are a gutless and are out of touch with reality. They do not care about us or our country. Sick and tired of the turn a blind eye approach by our current government. They are sitting pretty in their wealthy suburbs and are oblivious to what is happening in the real lives of the everyday struggling Aussie. It was a nothing budget for all of us.
George
11th May 2018
9:17pm
It's good that you are not going to vote for the major parties, and I have recommended the same to everyone. And yes, this Budget does NOTHING for us, i.e. Older Australians / Retirees / Pensioners.

However, Pauline has been looking for ways to ensure she supports the Big Tax Cuts for large businesses most of which will benefit foreigners. Either she is dumb, or she is clearly in bed with the Libs, especially as evidenced by her recent making up with Tony Abbott, the worst PM we have ever had!

I would instead suggest to put LAST all from major parties who are current seat-warmers (doing nothing for us) and vote for anyone else who MAY support Older Australians / Retirees or a candidate with a real chance to beat the current seat-warmer. We need a high turnover of MPs to ensure they don't get stuck to their seats just to become eligible to get their fat, untested, undeserved pensions after 8 years! Then, over time, things may start to change.
Jannie
11th May 2018
4:00pm
In Victoria winter has struck and I am sure a lot of people cannot afford to run their heaters due to the high cost of electricity and gas. What a let down in the budget they could have at least given a small amount of funding to help with these high costs, from memory they did give a little last year, is that so?
Jannie
11th May 2018
6:11pm
Morons in government is correct. WHAT ABOUT 50 MILLION DOLLARS BEING SPENT
ON A STATUE OF CAPTAIN COOK??? WHY??? WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY COULD BE SPENT IN OTHER AREAS EG HOSPITALS.
Fair Go
13th May 2018
5:10pm
Where did you do your survey regarding the homeowners $700,000 tied up in a home and $100,000 in other assets? I had nowhere near this when I retired, with a property worth only about $230,000 and not much cash or super at all. Get your facts right, I am sure there are many many Australians with wealth a lot lower than those "average" amounts but that still own a house.
KEVINJ
15th May 2018
2:36pm
Hearing Dr Lynham QLd, Speak, 2da,- 15-5-'18, 2 G B, ws Like Horrible Rave, from, il-legal,"ParachuTeD- I N-**Replacement", BEREJIKLIAN, Sydney **Of, DIS-GUSTING, EX-,PREMIER,- m. BAIRD, WHO - as a "NAZI'- type -Male, has CRIMINALLY Caused, -Every-1, to PAY "Out" OR,- Lose, their WealTH-(savings) on ELECTR & GAS.. Doing It, to Me, & PWR CORRUPTED, BEREJIKLIAN- takg, Over 'As' like,-a Loony "CLover MOORE", means the 4 Pollies, PLus, should have, Face PICS, HANGing, from PwR Pole Lines, AS EVIL Ppl were, IN old POLAND. These TYPES of PPL -R, SO reviled, - AUSTralia Wide, &, the Writer IS, a RevoLTing VICTIM Of, "N.S.W, LIB Party GRAND, -CORRUPTION", I n, an, i l--legal Contrived, DIS-MISSAL, as a SYDNEY, BUS DRIVER, UNDER the LUNATIC, EX- NSW PREMIER, { just 1 of, The WHole TOTAL },-I, E, - JOHN -- FAHEY, who became, a "Finance" "Minister", -- GOD, Save A L L - AUSTraLiaN CHilDReN, - from, a FUTURE, Under, - these DecrePiD, LAW-LESS, - PPL;- a LAW, unto THEM,- HORRID- SELVES. With an AttacHED & EVIL SENSE, - of, ENTITLEMENT, like, TWIN "ROBBER", BARRONS, -GILLARD &,-RUDD, SWAN, HOWARD, - E T C. - Neither, ever, Employed PPL.
fearlessfly
15th May 2018
2:42pm
What on earth is this unintelligible mishmash ?


Join YOURLifeChoices, it’s free

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