Hands off super: Costello

Peter Costello has warned the government against tinkering with our superannuation system.

Hands off super: Costello

Chairman of the Future Fund and former national Treasurer Peter Costello, has urged politicians to stop interfering with the country’s $1.9 trillion superannuation system.

Mr Costello has warned the government that considering the superannuation system as a way to improve the Budget’s bottom line will have long-term detrimental effects on the Age Pension and will increase the burden on younger Australians to cover the cost of “tinkering”.

“Increasing taxes on superannuation, which is a long-term savings vehicle, usually involves taking now at a cost to be borne sometime in the future,” said Mr Costello on Wednesday. “Governments are interested in the here and now – they don’t worry too much about what’s outside the forward estimates.”

“If taxes are on the rise, it means people will have lower retirement incomes, some especially those who live long longer will be back on the pension,” Mr Costello added.

The Intergenerational Report has highlighted the need for improved retirement planning. And with Australia’s population ageing rapidly, the onus to pay more taxes may fall on younger Australians meaning “future generations will have to pay our debts,” as stated by Mr Costello.

The former federal treasurer also endorsed the Financial System Inquiry’s (FSI) recommendation to legislate the objectives of Australia’s superannuation system. According to FSI chairperson David Murray, the purpose of superannuation should be to “provide income in retirement to substitute or supplement the age pension”.

“The idea of an objective is a good one – it might be helpful. It will make it clear the objective is not to provide a pool of money for the government to tax when it needs revenue,” Mr Costello said. “It will make it clear that changes should be assessed according to whether they help or hinder the long term ability to substitute or supplement the pension.”

Read more at Sydney Morning Herald.





    COMMENTS

    To make a comment, please register or login
    Adrianus
    1st May 2015
    9:13am
    We need Costello back!
    Patriot
    1st May 2015
    12:47pm
    Frank,
    Good, you're still there - I thought we'd lost you!
    Look, in relation to yesterdays subject (this morning's Post) I really could do with the money that seemingly has gone lost.
    Could you - PLEASE - just put me in the right direction to prove WHERE the hansard confirms that the Original Pension Scheme was cancelled and the money invested/collected in this SCAM was returned or put into a Super Account).
    I'll get back onto my Fed Member (shame I saw him yesterday and could have raised it with him then) and sought this out!
    Please give me "A Leg UP" as the money is needed !!!
    Just be a HUMANITARIAN (which I know you really are as you continuously POINT people in the appropriate direction) and not like so many others who refuse to help pensioners these days !?!?!?
    I beg you Frank - JUST SHOW SOME COMPASSION.
    Polly Esther
    1st May 2015
    1:36pm
    AKA... 'The worlds greatest Treasurer'
    Adrianus
    1st May 2015
    2:30pm
    Pat you are a riot he he he, I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about? You seem wound up about something though? What money has gone lost? What hansard report? So the original pension scheme was cancelled? And the money invested in a scam? Just show some compassion? I suggest you take it up with your Federal Member whoever that is.
    Patriot
    1st May 2015
    3:21pm
    Frank,
    I would do that gladly & intend to if you would/could only provide the reference to your claims!?!?.
    I cannot do that IF what you claim CANNOT be supported and, therefore, I am asking you to help me in order to support what you have claimed!
    Without that, he'll just consider it Bull!!! And so he should.
    This must occur with ALL info that is QUICKLY sprucked but has ZERO Substance.

    If what you're claiming is true the money accumulated before they cancelled the SCAM must be considered to be stolen and our governments would NEVER do such a thing - or would they?

    Anyway, I accept that you CANNOT support your claims in ANY WAY!!!!!
    Adrianus
    1st May 2015
    10:32pm
    And which claim would that be Patriot? The claim that there is no fund that we taxpayers pay into which distributes the aged pensions? It's common knowledge.
    Chris B T
    1st May 2015
    9:53am
    Costello and Co have the future fund, to fund their retirement and are outside of any new super rules.
    Pitty the future fund wasn't setup to meet the treasury sortfull for all not just the
    Choosen Ones.
    Abby
    1st May 2015
    8:13pm
    Spot on Chris
    Patriot
    1st May 2015
    8:15pm
    Chris,
    Same with us
    Our retirement was "set Up' and should be OutSide ANY NEW RULES!
    TREBOR
    2nd May 2015
    12:03am
    Patriot is correct - for over three quarters of a century levies have been included in income tax for pensions and unemployment benefits and so forth. That IS a future fund that should have been adhered to, but it seems government want to make those things an optional privilege(Entitlement ™) and not a Right, simply because it suits their ideology and their Budget schemes.

    Sorry lads - promises on core subjects by Government, irrespective of Party, are to be kept. Parties speak on behalf of government.. government does not speak on behalf of parties...... and when government makes a promise sealed with cash - it keeps them regardless of party in the hot seat.

    Thank you for coming....
    Patriot
    2nd May 2015
    12:26pm
    TREBOR
    Love the logic!
    Chris B T
    2nd May 2015
    1:15pm
    The "Future Fund" I'm referring to was setup with Bipartisan support when
    Costello was Treasurer. This fund is exclusively for Federal Politicans.
    The general revenue tax collection and distrubition is entirely different.
    As I Stated The CHOOSEN ONES.!!!!!!!
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2015
    3:29pm
    That is incorrect the future fund is for federal civil servants , who's super was unfunded .
    Federal politicians have their own duper scheme...
    Chris B T
    3rd May 2015
    10:13am
    What unfunded just like all other pensions.
    The 45% of non tax payers. The money for ANY GOVERNMENT comes from Taxes or selling PUBLIC ASSETTS, my oversight in excluding the other CHOOSEN ONES.
    Adrianus
    5th May 2015
    3:32pm
    I would much rather we had the future fund than have some labor government 10 years from now pushing up taxes to cover the shortfall.
    Ming
    1st May 2015
    10:42am
    Every day someone is on TV or radio and in the paper asking for more money. Many of the demands warrant support but nobody is prepared to contribute more tax so the demands can be met. The government does not have any money unless it gets it from the taxpayers. So wake up, either some existing outlays are going to have to be cut or abandoned unless we are prepared to contribute more tax. You know money does not grow on trees!!
    TREBOR
    2nd May 2015
    12:04am
    So cut the dead wood and keep the paid for promises of pension etc.....
    LiveItUp
    1st May 2015
    10:53am
    Only thing that government needs to do is include one's house in the assets test and then pensioners would be able to access its' worth and have more spending money in retirement. It seems just silly to me to go without so that one can leave the house to those who really don't need it in most cases.
    Patriot
    1st May 2015
    3:23pm
    Bonny,
    Indeed the bankers then have exactly what they want - OUR TITLE DEEDS.
    And that at a time when we have lost our earning capacity.
    Anonymous
    1st May 2015
    6:15pm
    Wrong, Bonny. The ONLY thing the Government needs to do is adopt the Green's reforms to superannuation, making it fair and equitable and affordable, and ensuring it delivers maximum benefits to both the people and the nation and ultimately eliminates the need for Aged Pensions. The current system is patently unfair - punishing battlers for investing in super and rewarding the rich with obscenely generous, and totally unnecessary, concessions that impose a massive burden on taxpayers. It's time for reform in the interests of the nation as a whole, instead of always pandying to the interests of the selfish well-to-do.
    Patriot
    1st May 2015
    6:43pm
    Rainey
    Agree with you - only this clarification I would like to add: " . . . . . . massive burden on taxpayers . . . . . . " These are the TaxPayers who really cannot afford to carry those who are "Putting a LOOT away" at their expense!
    Talking about "Leaners & Lifters" !!!
    Adrianus
    2nd May 2015
    7:10am
    Absolutely Bonny!!!
    This rort has been going on for far too long and needs addressing. The average value of a house in Sydney is $730k. Given that 75% of pensioners own their own house I would suspect many of them would easily get over $1m if sold. So why not tap into this equity? Why hide this wealth and become a welfare burden?
    Kato
    2nd May 2015
    7:21pm
    http://thenewdaily.com.au/money/2015/05/01/super-tax-solution-just-tax-everyone/?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20150102%20The%20New%20Daily%20(1)&utm_content=&spMailingID=22576401&spUserID=MTAyODk0MjkzNjI5S0&spJobID=560055819&spReportId=NTYwMDU1ODE5S0
    wally
    1st May 2015
    11:31am
    Superannuation, as I understand it, is to benefit the workers who made their contributions to it. Any benefit the government would get would be indirect as superannuants would be living on what they had invested. This meant that the government would have to spend as pensions.

    It would be undermining the original purpose of the superannuation scheme if the government decided to "raid the piggy bank" for short term gain. It would also be irresponsible and create precedent allowing future governments to do the same.

    It would bring to mind stories of corrupt union officials helping themselves to the union retirement funds that the union members contribute to. So leave Superannuation alone. You might get some short term financial gain, but you would also be getting more long term political pain for your trouble.
    wally
    1st May 2015
    11:34am
    correction: Last sentence in paragraph 1 should end "spend less on pensions".
    Anonymous
    1st May 2015
    6:18pm
    But the Greens aren't proposing to ''raid the piggy bank for short term gain'' or to be irresponsible, Wally. They are proposing to remove a massive inequity that is costing taxpayers billions and only boosting the already fat retirement nest-eggs of the very wealthy, while battlers are actually punished for saving and denied the chance to accumulate a decent retirement nest egg. It's past time to fix this absurd anomaly, and introduce a common-sense, equitable system. And happily doing so would also fix the budget deficit. Everyone should be supporting this proposal! It has NO downside. It's all benefit - every inch of the way, for everyone.
    wally
    2nd May 2015
    6:28pm
    Hi Rainey. I just re read my above post. I found no mention of the Greens or any other political party. Evidently, from your post, You say you saw that I did. I don't know what you are in the habit of smoking, but it is not doing your eyesight, or your analytical ability, any good.
    wondering
    1st May 2015
    12:29pm
    Using the 'Super Pool' to invest in infrastructure I believe would be a good thing,
    however I'm extremely tired of the 'under 50's' continually referring to retirees as 'the chosen ones'.
    a. most retirees worked very hard all their lives and are lucky to be alive to enjoy it, and
    b. hopefully, they will be retired one day also and would also deserve to retire to a life they worked hard for.
    LEAVE SUPER ALONE
    mangomick
    1st May 2015
    5:57pm
    If investing in infrastructure is such a good thing don't you think the Multi National companies would be doing so. The only infrastructure the government would be investing your super in would be anything that wouldn't provide a reasonable return.
    marls
    1st May 2015
    12:49pm
    leave the super alone, i worked and paid for my super and my 4 children and i went without because it was compulary for me to pay. instead of penalizing those who have worked and paid taxes, find jobs for the younger generation instead of them sitting at home playing video games on my taxes. and as far a people living longer possibly till 90+ rubbish not that many live til that age, my son died 26, father 58 brother 60. god states its 30score and 10 average thats 70 he knows better
    KSS
    1st May 2015
    7:39pm
    On the other hand my Aunt lived to 104, my Grandmothers to 94 and 89, my mother is currently 84 and going strong. Not too big a leap to see that people are in fact going to live well into their 90s in the very near future, although there will always be those who don't.
    mangomick
    3rd May 2015
    10:59am
    Well maybe the Government can do genetic testing and if your parents lived a long life you can't get your super until you are 75. Both my parents died in their late 60s very early seventies so maybe I should be able to access my super now so I can enjoy it with the Government safe with the knowledge that if they ever do have to pay me the super it won't be for very long :-)
    Tom Tank
    1st May 2015
    1:12pm
    Costello is only protecting the incredible additional benefits he bestowed on the already wealthy when he fiddled with superannuation when he was Treasurer.
    If those benefits are changed it will prove he was wrong in what he did and what politician will ever admit that.
    Sum1
    1st May 2015
    2:22pm
    TT..You seem to suffer from a bad case of Wealth Envy. I know a considerable amount of people from my generation who own more than one property, who live in middle class suburbs and living a good lifestyle. The one obvious similarity between them all is that they worked hard all their lives and made better decisions than the "forever needy".
    Tom Tank
    1st May 2015
    3:16pm
    Perhaps you should have a good hard look at the generous arrangements put into place by Costello and Howard that greatly favoured those who didn't need any assistance at all but those arrangements did not extend to the hard working people of average means.
    I am not envious of those who have more than me, good on them for having worked so hard what I do object to is the unfairness that exists that has led to the ever increasing gap between those who have and those who have not.
    It is a simple application of common sense to realise that if most of the wealth of a country is concentrated in a few hands there is less disposable income possessed by the vast majority of the population and hence the economy slows down. Look at what is happening around the world as the wealth gap increases.
    Justsane
    1st May 2015
    9:00pm
    Did anyone watch the program on ABC TV last night - The Super-Rich and Us? Seems that the trickle down theory has turned out to be trickle up reality, with the very rich buying up all the property, making getting into the housing market much more difficult for the rest of us. This program is from the UK, but has lessons for us in this country.

    1st May 2015
    2:21pm
    Common sense
    David Leyonhjelm guest post: Pensions are charity
    Posted on 11:20 am, February 17, 2015 by Rafe Champion
    From The Fin Review

    To my fellow mature Australians, I’d like to explain something. We are not entitled to an age pension merely because we have paid taxes all our life. Pensions are not for everyone; fundamentally they are welfare, reserved for the poor.

    Like many others, I have been in continuous employment since 1974 and paid my taxes each year, increasingly fairly considerable sums. But governments have not saved my taxes to pay for my retirement. Instead, those sums were spent each year. In fact, our taxes haven’t even covered each year’s government spending. Over the past forty years, budget deficits have been the norm, with the country now in debt to the tune of $245 billion. If anything, I and my fellow baby boomers should pay the rest of Australia a lump sum when we retire, to cover the debt we are leaving.

    http://catallaxyfiles.com/2015/02/17/david-leyonhjelm-guest-post-pensions-are-charity/
    Sum1
    1st May 2015
    2:39pm
    That's the way it works Pete. Responsible people make lifelong contributions to fund their retirement...then the drunken sailors come to power...Labor...and spend like there is no tomorrow. They don't get the blame for their indulgent wastefullness as it was..remember...a stimulus package. The spotlight is then turned onto greedy unconscionable people who made sacrifices in their lives...yes they have all the money and must be the only reason why others are poor.
    Anonymous
    1st May 2015
    6:25pm
    David Leyonjelm obviously has no respect for those who battled to save a little for retirement and are now being told they must forego all the comforts they worked and sacrificed to achieve because of politicians' irresponsible handling of money they took from us in tax. It's NOT our fault the country is in debt. It's the fault of the selfish, self-serving and irresponsible. And Sum1, it wasn't Labor's spending that caused the problem. It was Howard and Costello's massive tax cuts to the rich. And now Costello is screaming to maintain the grossly unfair superannuation tax concessions that, if remedied fairly, would result in eliminating the debt. There is no need to hurt retirees. Just fix the ridiculously inequitable system of concessions on super contributions and earnings so that the battlers get a fair benefit and the rich don't get an obscene and unfair handout. We can fix this nation - quite easily - if we stop the greedy and self-serving looking after their own interests at the expense of the majority.
    Justsane
    1st May 2015
    6:48pm
    I'd say that because pensions were originally funded by a levy, and this was never taken away, just incorporated into consolidated revenue, that the pension is an entitlement. But I really don't think it should be non means tested. I actually think that the assets test is about right now, apart from the double dipping of Super as part of an income stream, which was started on 1st January this year.

    Apparently, current workers in Germany pay for the pensions of those now retired. This sounds simple and logical, and of course this also happens in Australia in reality. To my mind, it is better than all this superannuation business. Super has flaws, one is called inflation, the other is corruption. You or your employer pay the money, and it has to be invested to keep up or ahead of inflation. Sometimes 'opt - out insurance' payments are automatically deducted, which could see your super dwindle down to practically zero. I have seen this happen.

    Also, who said that there were lies, damn lies and statistics? It maybe true that the male life expectancy at birth in 1909 was 55, but this does not mean that the average man was born, grew up, worked and dropped dead at 55 (thus obviating the need for a pension). It just means that a lot of people died from childhood diseases that are now irradicated, and that men went to war and many of them were cut down in their prime, long before 55 years of age. Smoking also played a huge part, of course. I know that one of my grandfathers lived to 82 or 83 (despite smoking a pipe) his wife, my grandmother, lived to 94 and my other grandmother lived to about 80. One of my uncles, born around 1916, lived until about 92 (he also smoked a pipe). A better statistic would be the proportion of men, working at say 40 years of age, who lived to, and beyond, pension age.

    (I also wrote this in "Because we paid taxes we are entitled to the pension.")
    Patriot
    1st May 2015
    6:56pm
    Justsane
    You're not "Just Sane" you are "Very Sane".
    The only remark object to is your "Unquantified" remark about means testing.
    If they are castles (Family Investment Mansions) YES Meanstest.
    Otherwise NO MeansTest Please.
    For the rest, a VERY SANE presentation - in my opinion that is!
    Justsane
    1st May 2015
    8:24pm
    Thanks, Patriot. I think the home that a pensioner lives in should not be included in the assets test. All other properties owned by the pensioner are fair game. This is the status quo at the moment.
    Patriot
    1st May 2015
    8:46pm
    Justsane
    Sorry - must have missunderstood
    TREBOR
    2nd May 2015
    12:13am
    David Leyonjelm obviously has no idea of what a levy or three on income tax to fund pensions actually means...

    Let me lay it out for you Davie......

    > Income tax contains a significant portion levied since around 1920 to fund pensions and other 'social security'

    > Everyone alive now has paid into that future fund

    > All of us paid our taxes, and I can recall not one person being so filthy low as to complain that the old and infirm and the out of work should not receive payment out of our taxes.

    > Since the levies were taken as income tax on taxable income, the benefits therefrom are fully paid for in advance - unlike super which enjoys tax havens.

    > Pension etc is therefore a Right fully funded in advance by the very people who receive it.

    Good day to you, sir..... I trust you are shown the door at the next election never to return... one so incompetent and lacking in knowledge has no place in government in my country.
    Chris B T
    3rd May 2015
    10:48am
    IN BEGINING
    Pensions were introduced for males 65, females 60.
    Life expectency average male 51 & 67 for average female. This would have excluded most the more labouious workers as they would die before retirement (Worked To Death) was the phrase.
    Present days those working conditons & labourious jobs have all but gone.
    Noteably some of the jobs & conditons have manage to be still around but in the main gone.
    The Problem Is Not Collecting Taxes but people surving.
    SORRY FOR LIVING LONGER and the Pete's of the world need to wakeup to that.
    The pension wasn't intended for most male's but the few who rode through thire working life without the pyshically challenging work of the time in worst conditons possible.
    wally
    3rd May 2015
    3:38pm
    David L's contention that pensions are a form of charity and should be removed for those who have worked and paid taxes all their working lives sounds like something out of 19th Century England. Does David propose that work houses be created to "park" the elderly unemployed to work at repetitious and menial tasks for their upkeep? Or would they be cast out in the street to make their own way and eke out an existence in the time they have left??

    I am not sure what plans David has for the aged unemployed in the future, but it seems that the proposal would kill off any incentive for today's workers to pay taxes to support a system that would cast them off, abandon and ignore them when their economic usefulness is at an end.
    Not Senile Yet!
    1st May 2015
    2:45pm
    The Leave Super alone Cry is a ill-informed bunch!!
    The Changes proposed to Super are all to do with the currently allowed exorbitant excesses for people on high incomes to STASH large amounts into it ....and thus AVOID paying their normal rate of tax.....by only paying 15% if they STASH it in Super!!!
    This is being abused by the Middle to Higher Income group to avoid paying tax....why not change the Threshold back to a reasonable Limit??? This happens to be part of the reason why the Government cannot balance the budget....far to many have simply used it as a tax avoidance scheme.....leaving a shortfall in Tax Revenue....which has to be made up by SCREWING the Pensioners and trying to retrieve the lost revenue!!!!
    Costello and Company are among those who have used this loophole to build retirement wealth.....and they do not want to loose their unfair advantage!!!
    As for Taxing it......He was the mongrel that brought in the original 15% tax saving for those who can Salary Package/and can afford to put more in than the average worker.
    Taxing Super...in any way....was never part of the Original Plan!!!
    It was supposed to remain Tax Free if you left it their for your retirement......but NO!.....the Governments interfered with it time and time again......even adding severe tax penalties for those who accessed it early.....even though most had to be defined as ill and unable to work to access it!!!
    The Mass exodus to SMF was directly caused by all the limitations placed upon Super Funds and their members as to How they can access it and when. The Hardship provision is inadequate....requiring 6 months on unemployment.....before one can access it!!! Most people with a Mortgage & Family who are unable to work are Bankrupt before they access it on Hardship grounds due to illness etc.!!! Yet it is their Money on which they have already paid Tax BEFORE it went into Super!!!
    As for the whinge about not being able to afford to pay a Pension to ALL the Baby Boomers......well wait just a minute!!!
    Who paid their taxes at a higher rate from 1950 till 1990 on the basis that the Government would pay a Pension on retirement???
    And out of that tax...put aside till 1990....who accessed the fund and spent the Lot??? Not the Baby Boomers...oh No...it was BOTH Parties who agreed to spend the Pension Piggy Bank!!!
    Just who paid for all the Bridges, Roads, Power Poles, Hospitals, Schools, and most of the Infrastructure that everyone enjoys access to today???? Oh hell yeah...by enlarge it was the Baby Boomers!!!!
    As to why they are broke....by their own admission they have granted far too many exemptions/loop holes to the Middle and Upper Class to avoid the NORMAL taxation rate for their incomes!!
    Salary Sacrificing should be ABOLISHED COMPLETELY!!
    ALL SUPER should be Not Taxed at all!!!
    All Super Rules should apply to all Super Funds regardless of whether they are Industry, Self Managed Funds or even MP's Super Fund!! So often, the Government has called for a Level Playing Field for everyone...Yet it is the Government who continually grants exemptions for some and not for others!!!
    As for Mr.Costello and his Hands Off Appeal....that was not his opinion when he was treasurer...so what has changed????
    I would be very interested in seeing just how much he has STASHED into his Super to avoid paying the Proper tax rate on his Income.
    I believe it would be so substantial he would be unwilling to publish it!!! And that is without his $2 for $1 Parliamentry Super Scheme at our expense or his Golden Handshake and accessibility allowed in his Super Scheme that is denied to the rest of us.
    Super was never meant to be Taxed....simply because your tax is based on your Gross Income.....so therefore your Super Contributions have already been taxed before it goes in!!!!
    But not so if you can Salary Sacrifice....then it is taken off your Gross before tax is applied!!! One rule for some...another rule for others!!!!
    Not Senile Yet!
    1st May 2015
    3:09pm
    By the way....those idiots brainwashed by the Current Governments' American Attitude to Welfare simply do not understand that the Australian Way is NOT the American Way!!!
    In Australia we leave no one behind in our Society...we take care of our Mates.....and the one misfortunate enough to have made costly mistakes or simply unable to self manage for whatever reason!!!
    In America they do not have that society value at all!! They use Welfare as a dirty Word and suggest that they should not be forced to support anyone through a tax system. It's bugger you...I am all right!!! That's why their crime rate is through the roof and the gap between the rich & Poor is enormous!!
    The Liberal Party wants to Americanise us through Propaganda suggesting that those who work hard should not have to support those who don't!!! No mention of the lack of Employment being a factor...nor is their any mention that they keep cutting Training programs and want to Privatise Education!!!
    Already they have Sold Off infrastructure that was paid for by the Taxpayer to Private Enterprise on the basis that Private Enterprise can manage it more efficiently and return Cheaper Prices.....that has worked hasn't it???? Power & Gas have Doubled in Price...not become cheaper!!!
    Both the Parties are now corrupt to their own view/agenda....so much so that the MP's do not represent the People anymore....they now represent their Own Party and are no less than Puppets!!!
    Unless people stop voting for these Parties & their Puppets....nothing will change!!!
    If you want a different Result/Outcome.....First you must change your own Point of View and then change who you choose to Vote for!!
    To keep voting the same way is to End up with the same Outcome!!
    Anonymous
    1st May 2015
    3:15pm
    It's called democracy . The right have been in power for the majority of time in Australia .. Including the Hawke govt ...
    Anonymous
    1st May 2015
    3:21pm
    The longest serving governments , have all been of the right , Menzies, Howard , Hawke in that order.
    mangomick
    1st May 2015
    6:05pm
    " In Australia we leave no one behind in our Society...we take care of our Mates.....and the one misfortunate enough to have made costly mistakes or simply unable to self manage for whatever reason!!!"
    Not Senile Yet...Mate..You need to get out a bit...That Australia hasn't been around for 35 years.............
    TREBOR
    2nd May 2015
    12:18am
    Mangomick and NSY are both right......
    Patriot
    2nd May 2015
    12:44pm
    Mango,
    Sad enough - you're right.
    GREED of the FEW has re-programmed the minds of the MANY in NEED is such a way as to make them "Live Out" the "Survival of the Fittest" theme and made us live like "Ultra Competitive Cats & Dogs".
    This scheme as opposed to MUTUIALISM under which we ALL are PROMOTED to have a DIGNIFIED & DECENT life ! Even for the GREEDY!!!

    1st May 2015
    3:31pm
    Dealing with a government and their policies there is no such thing as total fairness to/for everyone, so the goal is to come as close to that as possible for the masses affected by change. Set a date when these superannuation changes are to take effect and make it one to give as much sufficient and "fair" time (if there is such a thing in government operation manuals) for those approaching retirement age to "ready" their financial situation for the time thereafter. Those of us who are already retired continue to play the retirement game by the rules which have been set for us and which we were aware of before entering the "arena of the aged". I know "it's always easier to play the game from the stands", and since I'm not on Team Government that's what I'm doing, but, at least to me, this seem like a more equitable approach.
    Anonymous
    1st May 2015
    3:34pm
    45 per cent of Australians pay no income tax at all.

    Interestingly, that figure of 45 per cent is very close to the one used by Mitt Romney in the 2012 US presidential election campaign when he argued that 47 per cent of Americans pay no income tax and were therefore “moochers.” The economist Nicholas Eberstadt subsequently argued that the United States is now “on the verge of a symbolic threshold – the point at which more than half of all American households receive, and accept, transfer benefits from the government” – and suggested that there was now a divide between the “takers” and the “makers.”

    http://insidestory.org.au/who-gets-what-who-pays-for-it-the-welfare-state-debate-revisited/
    Anonymous
    1st May 2015
    3:36pm
    We all talk about entitlements but forget those that are paying for them ..,
    Anonymous
    1st May 2015
    4:12pm
    Hi, Pete, thanks for your reply, but I don't quite see how it relates to my comment.
    Patriot
    1st May 2015
    4:56pm
    Fast Eddie
    Those who now make the decisions & elect to treat us like SCUM certainly thought that their free education (& many other things provided by us) was an entitlement at the time.
    Didn't they !
    Anonymous
    1st May 2015
    5:03pm
    If you say so, but again, what does this have to do with my comment? What am I missing here?
    Patriot
    1st May 2015
    5:16pm
    Sorry,
    Wanted to address that remark to Pete
    Anonymous
    1st May 2015
    5:23pm
    It's OK, mate. I still don't know what Pete's alluding to. Have a great weekend.
    Anonymous
    1st May 2015
    5:23pm
    It's OK, mate. I still don't know what Pete's alluding to. Have a great weekend.
    TREBOR
    2nd May 2015
    12:20am
    In that case Pete, they need more income. Maybe we should just put everyone on the same income level and tax them all the same. That'd be totally fair....
    Adrianus
    2nd May 2015
    7:35am
    Pete, I agree with your comment. The left leaners are growing into a critically dangerous number. If this trend continues it may not be too much longer before an avalanche forces more of us to become left leaners.
    Fast Eddie, I disagree with your belief that super should be taxed even more. It should have a RBL based on what a member would need to fully fund retirement for 35 years. The balance over that amount could then be taxed at marginal rates.
    Kato
    2nd May 2015
    7:22pm
    http://thenewdaily.com.au/money/2015/05/01/super-tax-solution-just-tax-everyone/?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20150102%20The%20New%20Daily%20(1)&utm_content=&spMailingID=22576401&spUserID=MTAyODk0MjkzNjI5S0&spJobID=560055819&spReportId=NTYwMDU1ODE5S0
    auzie3136
    1st May 2015
    3:37pm
    Does anyone recall anything about Mr.Menzies bringing in the original Pension.
    Patriot
    1st May 2015
    5:20pm
    Yes, I do.
    Frank seems to recall that this has been cancelled though!
    I have haunted him for the references in Govt Hansard to prove this though but he has not been able/willing to provide this PROOF where the extra tax that was implemented for that purpose was refunded when they cancelled this SCAM.
    SO, If you cannot PROVE it, you claims MUST BE BULL !!!

    So, Ask Frank ans see if you can get the info from him !?!?!?!?
    mangomick
    1st May 2015
    6:29pm
    The Deakin government passed the Invalid and Old-Aged Pensions Act 1908.
    It was brought in by the Victoria and NSW State Governments prior to this.
    mangomick
    1st May 2015
    6:42pm
    Think Labor introduced a Social Welfare Contribution levy somewhere around 1945 that was a separate levy or tax to the income tax, to pay for future pensions and 5 years later Menzies rolled this into general income tax. Phillip Lynch and malcolm Frazer took what ever money was already sitting in a separate fund and rolled it into general revenue sometime during their reign.
    TREBOR
    2nd May 2015
    12:22am
    The Whitlam government raised that take of income tax to fund social security.....

    As I've said - this is a bought and paid-up promise made by government - parties can butt out of trying to change it. They can't accept money under false pretences...
    Adrianus
    2nd May 2015
    7:42am
    mango, you may need to say that louder so that Pat riot and TRE BOR can hear.
    Patriot
    2nd May 2015
    12:31pm
    Frank,
    As taxation did NOT REDUCE at the time and funds were NOT REFUNDED the "Deal" stands. That is - they are breaking a contract knowingly with the people of Australia.
    That is NOT LEGAL !!!
    Tomaso
    1st May 2015
    3:53pm
    Bet all Pollies have their supers water tight too
    worker
    1st May 2015
    4:02pm
    Again lets hit the little citizens with tax and more forms of tax and tax superannuation more for workers and reduce the age pension and increase the age of getting the age pension.
    if appears to be about those that can least afford it not about those that can afford it.

    well as a Australian citizen the employer of MP of parliament I suggest we (Australian citizens )
    A. stop paying perks and life time forms of pensions to how employees MP when they
    leave or are removed form parliament.
    B. Reduce there superannuation to be in line with all other Australian citizens.
    hence the above would bring then in line with all other workers employees and save
    pension cuts.
    Yes it maybe time to bring back Costello
    Patriot
    1st May 2015
    5:29pm
    And hold him to account for his deeds??
    marls
    1st May 2015
    5:45pm
    Totally agree they should be treated no different to any other worker
    auzie3136
    1st May 2015
    4:13pm
    I recall seeing a payslip from an old friend who has passed away it had the deduction of an amount paid from his pay packet allocated as a tax to pay for his future pension. Has anybody any recall of this kind of payment?
    Tracy
    1st May 2015
    4:31pm
    I received my up to date Superannuation statement yesterday and the fees have all gone up. They make it virtually impossible to be a self funded retiree. Charging Land Tax on investment properties that we own, increases the costs of daily living. I think I'll be working until I die at this rate.
    Mez
    1st May 2015
    4:45pm
    I always believed that Costello was a good and very sensible budget manager/administrator.
    Also pleased to tell Hockey to get his hands off super funds, besides, 90% of my super is my inheritence which I deposited into my account after it was sitting in a fixed term deposit account at only 4% interest earning after a year and a quarter.
    It would be HIGHWAY ROBBERY and the Libs have no right to steal from all the average wage earners!
    BIG BULLIES.....JUST LIKE PUTIN!
    Patriot
    1st May 2015
    5:01pm
    Mez,
    That's right.
    Just google the link below and you'll see how true that last sentence is!
    https://socioecohistory.wordpress.com/2014/04/05/pentagon-russia-wants-war-look-how-near-they-put-their-country-to-our-military-bases/
    Patriot
    1st May 2015
    7:46pm
    Mez,
    Looks like the Russians are really aggressive and bullying - dos n't it?
    Patriot
    2nd May 2015
    12:32pm
    Mez,
    Did you peruse the link I provided and what did you think?
    Kato
    2nd May 2015
    7:57pm
    http://thenewdaily.com.au/money/2015/05/01/super-tax-solution-just-tax-everyone/?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20150102%20The%20New%20Daily%20(1)&utm_content=&spMailingID=22576401&spUserID=MTAyODk0MjkzNjI5S0&spJobID=560055819&spReportId=NTYwMDU1ODE5S0
    auzie3136
    1st May 2015
    4:47pm
    This pension deduction was bought in by Mr.Menzies and was printed on payslips it was never repealed but suddenly stopped being marked on payslips. ARE WE STILL PAYING this money as a tax and did the government just hope it would be forgotten?
    Patriot
    1st May 2015
    5:02pm
    auzie3136
    YES to ALL
    auzie3136
    1st May 2015
    5:38pm
    Many years ago when I was working for the Commonwealth at the Repatriation Hospital I recall them taking from our superannuation scheme a huge sum and transferred it into Internal Revenue because they said there was too much in the fund,they then started to encourage people to resign or retire and paid them a package. Consequently this also took a large sum from the scheme. THEY DID NOT RETURN THE MONEY THEY (stole) from the scheme. They also did not pay the cost of living amount to their retirees that everybody else received.
    mangomick
    1st May 2015
    5:54pm
    Gee it must rub on Federal and State Treasurers to see all that money just sitting there and not being able to get their grubby little fingers on it. One day my pretty..... One day...
    Just think If it wasn't for that rotten little Johnny Howard we may have seen a Great Prime Minister In Peter Costello and a more endearing Liberal National Party with a greater social conscience than we have today.
    Patriot
    1st May 2015
    6:07pm
    mangomick
    The only thing they ALL are really good at is SIMPLE GREED.
    Forget the rest!
    TREBOR
    2nd May 2015
    12:26am
    ooorh.. The Precious... Golem must have..... no.. NO.. bad Golem...... The Precious.... oooorh it is so lovely.... must have......
    Patriot
    2nd May 2015
    12:34pm
    TREBOR
    They are no "Lords" and - as far as I'm concerned, they can shoved up their "Rings"!

    1st May 2015
    6:12pm
    Costello is looking after his rich buddies - again! He's completely ignored the fact that the system actually achieves the reverse of its objectives and WILL NOT put pressure on the Aged Pension if appropriately reformed - but will relieve pressure. At present, it punishes battlers for saving (forcing them to pay as much or more tax on the investment income in their super fund as they pay on their regular earnings) while it imposes a multi-billion-dollar cost on taxpayers to generously subsidize the retirements of the rich by giving them concessions of up to 33c in the dollar. It's blatantly unfair! The Greens have proposed a fair and equitable reform that would ease pressure on the budget deficit AND boost retirement incomes for battlers so that pensions cost less in years to come.
    Costello should stop his self-serving interfering and let the Government do what is right.
    Adrianus
    2nd May 2015
    7:00am
    Gee Rainey, who would have thought the Greens are so fiscally responsible? Not only that but they are now fair and equitable??? Costello is right, super should not be watered down any more, other than to reinstate a blanket RBL. Super should be left alone for 20 years.
    auzie3136
    1st May 2015
    6:17pm
    There is or was another unequal situation with superannuation then if men passed away their super went to the wife but if women passed away their super was not passed on it remained in the fund. I think maybe this is why there was quite a lot of money in the fund and when the government stole this money from the fund it would have left quite a hole. This money was not theirs but they still took it. This money should have been passed on to the families belong to the women who passed away. It was payed because men were considered the breadwinners even though a lot of women were alone and supporting a family. IS THAT FAIR?
    Peterrj
    1st May 2015
    9:18pm
    "... the objective is not to provide a pool of money for the government to tax when it needs revenue,” Mr Costello said. Sadly for those who are putting their faith into Super it will merely become a Wealth Bank for future Governments to tax and steal your life saving from you to give it to far more deserving destitute people who were denied the opportunity to pay any tax during their life and/or save for their old age! If you are a young person and putting cash into Superannuation then may I now thank you for allowing to to have a decent life style as I get older as that is where the Government will get the cash to pay me. Just remember: Fools and their money are easily departed!!!! I can't wait for the next Labor Budget!!!!
    Adrianus
    1st May 2015
    10:39pm
    There was a time when super was not taxed. Hawke really hit it hard with 15% income tax and 15% contributions tax.

    2nd May 2015
    12:13pm
    Superannuation is a con . Workers are forced to give up ten per cent of their salaries to compete with getting the pension .
    To make sure they never achieve this we tax contributions and earnings this reducing the pool available by 30 to forty per cent .
    There is 16 billion sitting in funds of unclaimed super , being eaten away to nothing by Fees .
    This is 10 per cent of someone's wages that has been sacificed.
    It is estimated that 40 per cent of workers have some lost super.
    Adrianus
    2nd May 2015
    12:31pm
    Pete, when you put it in those terms it wouldn't make a lot of sense to many. However, to be fair to superannuants the goal posts have been moved a few times after many of them got into the game. And for many others who have built up a balance in excess of $100k without a single contribution, they have no choice. I can only imagine that a good proportion of the $16b must belong to illegals who have left the country? If left unclaimed after 20 years or so it should go into an "Aged/Invalid Pension Fund."
    Many people start a job and give false details or insufficient details, then leave. The employer has to pay the money to the ATO to avoid getting fined. A practice which has been going on for 40 years.
    Tom Tank
    2nd May 2015
    3:36pm
    If they are illegals they are paid less, in cash, and no superannuation is paid.If they paid tax and super contirbutions made for them they would be tracked down, at least in theory, but the employers would be found and penalties apply for employing illegals.
    What about those whose bosses didn't pay their workers superannuation then declared bankruptcy and the workers lost the lot, unless of course their boss was John Howard's brother.
    This has happened and continues to happen even altho' the ATO is supposed to police it. I know from first hand experience that this is true.
    mangomick
    2nd May 2015
    4:37pm
    Sad indictment on a persons intelligence if they can't keep track of their own super. There are plenty of sites around that will locate and advise a person of any super they may or may not be aware of.
    Adrianus
    2nd May 2015
    5:18pm
    I think those people who are on a 405 or 410 need to actually leave the country before they can claim and Kiwis cannot claim their DASP? So it is no wonder the amount builds up over the years. I can confirm that mango, I just had a quick look and found accounts in the names of Tom Tank, Patriot and TREBOR.
    Anonymous
    3rd May 2015
    11:48pm
    Those out here on a break year and legally work pay super...They were also sent 1000 dollar cheques by Rudd...
    Adrianus
    6th May 2015
    9:16am
    They will be disappointed when they come back and find the adults have taken charge and there will be none of that nonsense.
    Kato
    2nd May 2015
    7:20pm
    Super in its current form is unsustainable and like welfare will be left until the stuff hits the fan then it will be its all your fault. That's how they work isn't it.
    Anonymous
    3rd May 2015
    11:53pm
    Who are "They"
    Young Simmo
    2nd May 2015
    11:59pm
    OK, don't tell me as I am Smart enough to know I am off subject. BUT I will say it anyway, what a refreshing lovely story is the Princess Kate new baby girl story. I normally consider myself to be an ignorant, couldn't care less Aussie bloke, but I am so happy for this wonderful couple, after reading all the horrible unpleasant news we have been dealt over the last 2 or 3 months.
    Anybody agree?
    Anybody agree???????????
    mangomick
    3rd May 2015
    8:43pm
    Think we are all Republicans here Simmo.
    Anonymous
    3rd May 2015
    11:45pm
    What kind of Republican , Direct Elect or Parliamentarian.,.
    Anonymous
    3rd May 2015
    11:52pm
    Those who want to reverse Mr Whitlam's creation of an Australian Monarchy defeated themselves in the referendum , by the direct elect crowd voting to keep the Monarchy.,.
    mangomick
    4th May 2015
    4:36am
    The couldn't give a damn about the Royal baby kind.....
    Anonymous
    4th May 2015
    10:07am
    Well that kind of woman's weekly reply , shows why the republicans lost the referendum..
    mangomick
    4th May 2015
    11:12am
    Well Pete..... no doubt you are a.... "days of our lives" and "the young and the restless" type of guy.....
    Young Simmo
    4th May 2015
    11:30am
    Come on you blokes, this Tit for Tat is going in circles, I won't to see a big bunch of fives on the end of a beak, and a spilt beer on the floor, He, Ha, He, Ha.
    geomac
    4th May 2015
    11:52am
    There is a baby born every day in Australia Simmo. Are you rejoicing for them ?
    Anonymous
    4th May 2015
    11:57am
    Are they likely to Fill the roll as Australias Head of State...In Mr Whitlans Monarchy?
    mangomick
    4th May 2015
    1:43pm
    And that counts for what exactly???? Some token gesture to appease the apron string set. Let's get rid of Abbott , bring in Turnbull let him declare ourselves a Republic and let Australia finally grow a set.
    I have had enough of always hearing about Englands answer to the Kardashians.So they had another baby...... Big deal .....so did my son and daughter.
    Young Simmo
    4th May 2015
    1:44pm
    Not in my household geomac. If there was I would like to meet the Father, because it sure as hell aint me.
    geomac
    3rd May 2015
    6:53pm
    Costello and Howard created the budget structural deficit so its a bit of a cheek having the spineless one giving advice on super. Costello was instrumental in the creation of the age of entitlement and generally dog paddled his way as treasurer. Still on the public teat in one way or another, lobbyist or future fund. Made his name with dollar sweets case as the junior lawyer so always second banana in a sense. Brandis doesn,t even have that, 3rd rate.
    geomac
    4th May 2015
    1:12pm
    Established the Australian Honours System
    In accordance with Labor Party policy as determined by the 1971 Federal Conference, the Whitlam Government opposed the conferral of honours under the imperial honours system.253 The system, which allowed the Prime Minister to recommend knighthoods be granted to individuals was seen by many as a throwback to Australia’s colonial past, and a system ill-fitting with the modern Australian nation and its place in the world. Since 1967, Whitlam had advocated the creation of an Australian honours system, called the Order of Australia.254

    On February 14, 1975, the Order of Australia was established.255 It was based broadly on the Order of Canada.256 The Order of Australia differs from the imperial honours system in that final decisions relating to awards are made by the Council for the Order of Australia, rather than by a politician. This helps ensure that the awards system is merit-based and apolitical.257
    geomac
    4th May 2015
    1:13pm
    Amended the royal title
    Following the passage of the Whitlam Government’s Royal Style and Titles Act, the Queen’s official title was amended. From that time on, she was thereafter known as Queen of Australia in her capacity as the Australian monarch.258 The first function Queen Elizabeth II attended as Queen of Australia was a lunch at the Lodge on October 19, 1973, at which Senior Vice President of the Labor Party, Jack Egerton greeted her by remarking ‘they tell me, luv, you’ve been naturalised’.259

    5th May 2015
    10:11am
    The Order of Australia is an order of chivalry established on 14 February 1975 by Elizabeth II, Queen of Australia, to recognise Australian citizens and other persons for achievement or for meritorious service. Before the establishment of the order, Australian citizens received British honours.

    The order is divided into general and military divisions, with the following grades in descending order of seniority:

    Knight and Dame of the Order of Australia (AK and AD – General Division only – quota of 4 per annum);[1][3][4]
    geomac
    5th May 2015
    1:13pm
    Sir Les Patterson is a good example of knighthoods and their worth. After the captains pick the picker is equally as shallow as the one picked. Colonel blimps and dodgy cops like Lewis in QLD while real contributors to their fellow citizens are seldom in line for a gong. Twaddle and pomposity dressed up as having a meaning. A sick joke belonging to days of yore.
    wally
    11th May 2015
    11:34am
    Vote 1 for Sir Les Colin Patterson for Governor General!

    5th May 2015
    2:15pm
    It has been claimed monarchism and republicanism in Australia delineate historical and persistent sectarian tensions with, broadly speaking, Catholics more likely to be republicans and Protestants more likely to be monarchists.
    This developed out of a historical cleavage in 19th- and 20th-century Australia, in which republicans were predominantly of Irish Catholic background and loyalists were predominantly of British Protestant background.[29] Whilst mass immigration since the Second World War has diluted this conflict,[28] the Catholic-Protestant divide has been cited as a dynamic in the republic debate, particularly in relation to the referendum campaign in 1999.

    Wiki
    geomac
    5th May 2015
    2:46pm
    The monarchs belong to the pages of history or as tourist attractions ala Disneyland. Great for the UK but zilch for Oz. Good for free holidays and gifts in Australia costing millions to the taxpayer but no return in trade or governance. A long distance joke where the royals promote UK trade and business and even Olympics over the Australia. We get nothing in return but a chance to tugg our forlock. Abbott has shown how ridiculous that fawning can be, addles the brain. Arise Sir Prince etc etc here is another dodgy title to go with the other 20 or so that you can put in the drawer. A sick joke.
    Anonymous
    5th May 2015
    10:11pm
    You sound a very bitter person...lighten up .
    I understand your anti English rants as the article says above the Catholics were indoctrinated by Irish Nuns , that why they say Heitch , So your Catholic private school indoctrination only shows your chip ., Grow up ...
    Radish
    5th May 2015
    3:10pm
    I heard Bill Shorten say that he was glad to heard the government is going to not index pensions to the CPI as it was unfair.

    I assume when he gains office he will make sure those public servants, defence force personell etc will be changed from the CPI in line with aged pensions. If it is unfair for one lot on pensions it is surely unfair for another.
    mangomick
    5th May 2015
    3:23pm
    Two sides to every story.From what I understand of Ex Defense Forces personnel and their Super, they don't have the luxury of having their super in an accumulation fund gaining an attractive return and they can't transfer it into one when they finish their enlistment into a company or industry fund or private SMSF. Instead it just sits there held by the Government gaining whatever the CPI is for that year. it's held there gaining next to nothing until such time as they retire.
    Adrianus
    5th May 2015
    3:29pm
    It may be unfair for some belt tightening but with the RBA cash rate now at 2% it is a very reasonable thing to do. I would say taking out a reverse mortgage now is also a good thing to do because rates are so low.
    Anonymous
    5th May 2015
    10:06pm
    Yes Radi and I hope he takes those civil servants who get full parental leave off taking the minimum wage as well .,We can't afford it ..
    Plus we should stop forcing those , Who belong to unions that sign agreements with employers, Of having. to belong to the Union super fund .. No choice

    6th May 2015
    9:09am
    Super is paid for by the employers.. Governments had not set aside money for Civil Servants as Private Employers have to . Therefore The Civil Servants Super was paid out of General Revenue . A future burden on our children .
    The taxpayers of this generation under John Howard set aside Seventy Billion into a future fund to make it self funding . The future fund achieves.a Return of 11.2 ..
    eggles01
    7th May 2015
    10:43pm
    do not worry about the super Cossi yours will not be touched