Research identifies ‘glaring failure’ in super system

Independent, reliable and easy-to-understand information not available, says AIST.

The Government must develop an online tool to compare super funds, according to new research commissioned by the Australian Institute of Superannuation Trustees (AIST) and conducted by Essential Media.

“A high level of confusion among members of poorly performing super funds points to the urgent need for a government-sanctioned online tool to help Australians make more informed choices about their super savings,” the AIST says.

The research, which involved face-to-face focus groups in Sydney and Melbourne and an online survey of 529 retail fund members, shows that a big proportion of Australians are misinformed about how their super fund is performing and even what type of fund they are in.

It found:

  • About one-third of retail fund members think there is no point in looking at past returns to assess performance. The AIST says: Both the online survey and focus group discussions indicate a level of scepticism that past performance is an indicator of future performance. This is despite most evidence pointing to it being a reliable indicator.
  • Most members of retail funds believe their funds are performing on par or better than the industry average. The AIST says: On average, retail funds underperform profit-to-member funds.
  • Retail fund members struggle to understand the difference between for-profit and profit-to-member funds. The AIST says: One-quarter of for-profit fund members surveyed mistakenly thought they were in an industry fund.
  • One-quarter of those who ‘chose’ a for-profit retail fund were encouraged to join the fund by their employer, while nearly 40 per cent received advice from their accountant, financial planner or bank.

The research found there was a healthy appetite for tools that allowed people to make their own decisions. Seventy-one per cent supported a government agency setting up a comparison website to help people compare super funds against each other.

AIST chief executive Eva Scheerlinck says that while standardised reporting has been introduced for MySuper default funds, it is difficult, if not impossible in some cases, to compare funds in the non-default (Choice) sector, where there was almost twice as much in savings under management (more than $1 trillion). Even in the MySuper sector, consumers wanting to compare funds often have to search across multiple fund websites for the product information.

“Many Australians are languishing in poorly performing super funds with no easy way of knowing that their fund is a dud,” Ms Scheerlinck says. “In the 21st century, comparing super funds shouldn’t be that hard.”

“Australians should be able to access independent, reliable and easy-to-understand information to assist them in making informed choices. Right now, this isn’t possible and we know this is a glaring failure of our system.”

A Productivity Commission report released late last year found that a poorly performing fund could cost a worker up to $400,000 over a full working life and even $60,000 for workers aged 55 who planned to work another 10 years.

Alex Dunnin, executive director of research and compliance at researcher Rainmaker, told The Age that all super funds – both industry and retail – needed to do better in communicating with their members simply and effectively.

“Those retail fund members who don’t appear to trust or believe the industry fund story ... could be costing themselves big money in foregone superannuation savings,” he said.

Helen Rowell, deputy chair of the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA), cautions that acquiring information and presenting it in a way that balances accuracy and simplicity is “extremely challenging”.

“The waters are further muddied by a tendency for vested interests to skew the data to paint their sector, fund or product in the most flattering light,” she said in a speech last month.

Are you totally comfortable that your retirement savings are in the best super fund for you? Do you believe the industry needs to provide a better tool to evaluate funds?

If you enjoy our content, don’t keep it to yourself. Share our free eNews with your friends and encourage them to sign up.

RELATED ARTICLES





    COMMENTS

    To make a comment, please register or login
    Mindy
    29th May 2019
    9:53am
    So who would evaluate the funds? Those same public servants that manage that dog of a fund - PSSAP?
    Sal
    29th May 2019
    10:11am
    Found this on the AIST website.
    "The Australian Institute of Superannuation Trustees is a national not-for-profit organisation and is the principal advocate and peak representative body for the $1.4 trillion profit-to-member superannuation sector."
    So they represent the Industry funds. Of course they will disparage all retail funds. There are obviously some bad retail funds as there are industry funds but some perform quite well.
    TREBOR
    29th May 2019
    12:02pm
    Nobody needs to step too far to disparage retail funds and their performance. One or two have done all right - the rest are costly white elephants.

    Them's facts - not ideologies.
    MICK
    29th May 2019
    10:24am
    "The Government must develop an online tool to compare super funds".

    Do you really think that our right wing government would EVER want people to compare Retail Funds with Industry Funds? Not in my lifetime.
    The reality is that the current government is still trying to cut down Industry Funds by installing top end of town directors to financially strip them. Nothing will change that.
    TREBOR
    29th May 2019
    12:04pm
    Only a compulsory scheme as I've outlined, outside the hands of government, business, and unions... and controlled by its own people who are carefully vetted etc and elected annually.

    As I said - no well-heeled politician etc will want to be involved in that, for the simple reason that their super will be capped and the rest is savings pure and simple and tax paid on income derived - what a change!
    jackie
    29th May 2019
    2:18pm
    MICK, I agree. It's sad that business can't be transparent on their websites.
    roy
    29th May 2019
    3:37pm
    This dreadful right wing gov't MICK, still being a sore loser!
    Sal
    29th May 2019
    4:47pm
    Mick, I think you will find that Industry Funds have shares in the Top End of Town including banks.
    Paddington
    29th May 2019
    8:44pm
    roy, it goes way beyond being a winner or a loser. It is about right and wrong.
    I will let you know when I see this government do something right. We are not holding our breath however.
    TREBOR
    30th May 2019
    10:54am
    Very true, Sal - you point to the very real issues around need for genuine tax simplification, to remove current problems with understanding simple concepts, such ad franked dividends.

    It being tied into super funds is an emotive red herring - as long as tax matters are handled correctly - a process that will be made easier by abolishing franked dividends entirely and allowing all to work their own tax out - there will be NO change.

    What will need a long hard look is the highly preferential 'superannuation' funds that permit some to retire with kazillions - simple answer - put a limit on funds that may be accumulated, treat all funds by the exact same rules and standards, and all saved after that is savings and income derived from it is taxable.

    At the same time, set up a fully independent one-stop shop super fund for all Australians, accept contributions to the mandatory maximum, permit high deposits if the 'shareholder' wishes, but those will be taxable on income derived in the future... start with returning the Future Fund to Australian shores and spreading its wings to cover Australia - not just its chosen few. Government using $130Bn and growing of OUR money as an offshore business venture is abominable, and more in keeping with the Third World Banana Republic that this nation has become in which El Presidente and his cronies rob the National Treasury at their whim (the Hubris Of Howard - great name for a play) - but which it does not wish to be.

    Vive La Patrie!!

    There are people out there enjoying the use of piles of money, who superficially live in the red or on the breadline constantly... can't be done... tax rules need to change.

    (Welcome to Around The World With Trebor)
    TREBOR
    30th May 2019
    10:59am
    Let's try a simpleton example - Tony Abbott may accumulate $1.5m (good figure to start but should be indexed according to some rule) - if it earns 10% (tax free), it pays him $150k p.a... not the $300 he is currently getting free and indexed for life.

    Most would not consider that $150k excessive - but the politicians view it as miserly (did-ums).

    A one-stop shop fund would be able to, like the old Pension scheme, index the payout annually or on a regular basis... so nobody would miss out. Current funds cannot do that - see the tears from those with purchased funds that are not indexed - and once someone has retired, their annual payout remains the same from a super fund (correct me if I'm wrong). That means someone living an extra twenty years - say to 87 - will end up on skid row due to real inflation and rising costs of living. Crazy scheme that.
    TREBOR
    30th May 2019
    11:10am
    Thank you, Paulo - that's the term - Allocated Pension Fund.... a trap for those otherwise who should be on a good run in retirement, since they are not indexed.

    I know a few on those....
    GeorgeM
    31st May 2019
    12:02am
    If the Govt doesn't do it, MICK, surely the Industry Funds with the Billions under their control can afford to do it themselves - say by hiring an Independent company, thus ensuring all have such a tool to prove that they are better than the Retail funds.
    Why doesn't AIST suggest that?
    IMH
    29th May 2019
    10:25am
    There is an existing comparison website - I've been using for at least the last 10 years....

    https://www.superratings.com.au/
    jackie
    29th May 2019
    11:25am
    IMH, I just had a look at the site and it wants all your details first. I don't like that pushy attitude. I don't trust them for that. Their site needs to be transparent.
    TREBOR
    29th May 2019
    12:05pm
    I agree jackie - any time such a site wants full details, you know you are in for endless calls and stuff... unless I know a phone number these days, I just don't answer.
    FrankC
    29th May 2019
    4:25pm
    I agree Trebor.
    Paulo
    29th May 2019
    11:26am
    More important than reviewing super funds is the need to review the Alloccated Pension Funds. My wife's fund has been losing up to 3% pa and to change funds will see Centrelink step in and reduce both our pensions
    Mootnell
    29th May 2019
    5:14pm
    Is that because thy will make more money, so Centrelink deem you should be taking that extra out to live on? Or is there another reason?
    Circum
    29th May 2019
    11:59am
    The concept of being able to compare funds is obviously a good one.Unfortunately its difficult as there is no standard where you can compare apples with apples.Each fund creates categories of risk eg.Growth,Balanced,Stable etc.It then allocates a percentage of its investment products such as Australian shares,fixed interest,Property etc into each category.
    So one fund may allocate 20% of Australian shares into its Growth portfolio but another super company may allocate 35% into its growth portfolio .So you cannot currently just look at returns to compare funds.But it can be a guide to look deeper into the figures.
    TREBOR
    29th May 2019
    12:09pm
    Asian guy often travels overseas, and changes his money on return to Mascot (this one was running when I did security there) - usually he gets around a dollar AU for 80-odd Syengalese drachmae - one trip he gets only 70 - and, upset, he asks the exchange clerk:-

    "Wha' happen?"

    Clerk says :- "Fluctuations!"

    Indignant Asian says :- "Well, fluck tu Australians, too!"
    Circum
    29th May 2019
    11:59am
    The concept of being able to compare funds is obviously a good one.Unfortunately its difficult as there is no standard where you can compare apples with apples.Each fund creates categories of risk eg.Growth,Balanced,Stable etc.It then allocates a percentage of its investment products such as Australian shares,fixed interest,Property etc into each category.
    So one fund may allocate 20% of Australian shares into its Growth portfolio but another super company may allocate 35% into its growth portfolio .So you cannot currently just look at returns to compare funds.But it can be a guide to look deeper into the figures.
    TREBOR
    29th May 2019
    12:01pm
    Before reading the article, I'll state categorically that the failure is in the 'business model, which automatically adhered fees and costs and thus neutered the approach to savings by costing too much and taking too much away from the actual nest egg.

    I had a private super fund before the compulsory, and the figures were that costs and taxes rendered it non-viable as an 'investment'. The ONLY good super around at the time was subsidised employer super such as government employees.

    On a side note and as a continuation of yesterday's blurb - the fruit of compelling 70%+ women into such positions will ripen at age 50 for super.... another 22 years or so, when the reality will strike.
    Rae
    29th May 2019
    4:29pm
    Might not take that long TREBOR. After 10 years of being in the greatest boom ever people forget there is always a downside.
    TREBOR
    29th May 2019
    11:58pm
    I feel the crunch - in several ways. I've been labeling 2019 -The Year Of Decision.

    It seems that one decision has been made - NOT to employ Labor in the top slot, but to exist on the crumbs of policy wrought by the 'other side' of The Tag Team.

    Reactionism is coming on many issues - you can see it and feel it - the Labor's policies were just too much of a mish-mash of goodies and baddies for people to stomach any more. That means the reaction to things 'feminist' and all the other ideologies doing the rounds is growing - ordinary people are sick and tired of being put last for any consideration,and being forced to stand aside while governments respective trample all over the underpinnings of this nation in many ways. Reaction to social policy.

    On the international scene, I see the same reactionism developing in relations with certain nations and their expansionist designs.

    Also a reaction to the 'global economy' and its many rorts to suit the New Robber Barons... and its destruction of national economies and the people who rely on them.

    Australia is in a very strange position - while having virtually no solid industrial etc underpinnning, and being robbed daily by offshore corporations, and with a permanent (as I predicted in 1983) underclass of un- and under-employed and steady erosion of lifestyle via rising costs of living - i can buy a pair of glasses in Oz for $150.... I get two pairs delivered overseas rates for $75 from California.

    Something wrong with this picture? Country's broke and paying first world prices for everything plus the Australian bonus.... people are broke and paying first world prices for everything plus the Australian bonus - and politicians of all kinds want to further reduce the incomes of the lowest paid - all in the name of economic rationalism.

    I've said many times that government is not a business and should not be shoring up businesses or itself acting like a business.... it is a SERVICE to the nation and people.
    Jim
    29th May 2019
    12:47pm
    I was in a super fund prior to super becoming compulsory, as soon as it became compulsory, I can’t remember if industry funds started up at the same time, but I joined an industry super fund as soon as I was able, the fees were much less than retail funds, I think at the time the fees were about .33% and the insurance came in units of about 55 cents per unit, which was a lot cheaper than insurance from outside of super. Superannuation was the best thing ever introduced for us workers and has given us a much better retirement than we could have expected without super and I can only see it getting better, others might have a different opinion or experience to mine so each of us a different, but I couldn’t be happier with how super has worked out for me.
    Diogenes
    29th May 2019
    1:01pm
    Agree Jim, Super if monitored judiciously can set us up for a reasonable retirement.
    Rosret
    29th May 2019
    1:41pm
    Jim you are part of the earlier superannuation schemes. You are lucky as you are set for life. Anyone who is part of superannuation schemes starting in 1990 is part of the new scheme.

    Most of us contributed far more than the compulsory 3% because its obvious the extrapolation of funds available at retirement was not going to be sufficient.

    I stopped going to superannuation talks because I would come out depressed. They indicated I needed to put in more than 100% of my salary to have enough in retirement and even then they budgeted on me being on a full pension at 80 years of age.

    Basically it was an impossible goal cruelled by the GFC so I stopped topping up my super and planned another strategy.

    This new system has done exactly the opposite of what it intended. The government wanted us all off the pension yet now people who would never have been on pension will be lining up cap in hand with all those who have been less fortunate.
    Anonymous
    29th May 2019
    3:43pm
    Interesting comment Rosret. We don't have the required $1M+ that we have been told is a basic requirement to be comfortable in retirement and we were pleased to hear an economist on TV explain that we can get by with much less. If a couple has about $300,000 in super, owns their own home with not more than $75,000 in other assets and assuming no income then there is an age pension of just over $36,000pa. Add the compulsory drawdown of 5% and there is about $1,000 per week to live on. That would equate to a wage earner getting about $62,500pa. which is about the average wage.
    FrankC
    29th May 2019
    4:31pm
    I wentr to one of those once, Rosret, and was told I need to put 140% of my salary into a superfund to acheive a comfortable retirement. Can't remember who they were, but it wasn't my current fund, HESTA.(Industry ) Growth, 10.7% last year !
    Rae
    29th May 2019
    4:35pm
    Yes Old Man that is the best position. It's far better even that those defined benefit schemes which were very expensive and denies an aged pension and concessions literally losing the saver that $36 000 a year.

    The changes in 2015/16/17 budgets has made accumulating too much superannuation costly and a poor strategy.
    Rosret
    29th May 2019
    1:08pm
    When I was contributing to super I asked the company accountant if I could chose my superfund and I was told quite emphatically - no.
    I understand I could have chosen my fund, but hey - you don't take on the payroll master.
    Anonymous
    29th May 2019
    3:47pm
    Yes Rosret, I was working with a few labour hire companies for a time and I was forced to open a number of super funds because each of them was aligned with different funds. When I enquired about using my provider and pointing out that I could do that, the response was, "If you want to work with us you do as we tell you". I was in no position to pick and choose.
    FrankC
    29th May 2019
    4:47pm
    I had a similar encounter with my paymaster at a hospital in Tasmania, who told me that I have to pay a portion of my salary into the Retirement Benefit Fund, otherwise they cannot pay me !! It turned out after about 6 years, when a guy from RBF came up from Hobart to talk to us about super, that we did not have to enter into ther RBF super fund if we didn't want to; he was extremely annoyed about that deceipt .Not being familiar with super funds, I naturally joined it , and after 10 years when I left, I received back from The RBF around $10K, the amount that I had put into the fund, not one cent of interest. I found out a few years later , I could have taken them to court over that.
    Lark Force
    29th May 2019
    1:18pm
    We older folk are pretty much stuck with our financial situation. But you can only hope that your descendants will be much wiser than we were. I never received any financial advice when I was at school, or after leaving school. Times were different (full employment etc.) and I did ok. Its up to us now to ensure that our descendants get good advice. I suggest that Scott Papes' book, The Barefoot investor is a good place for them to start to learn about wealth growth.
    Rosret
    29th May 2019
    1:26pm
    It wouldn't have made any difference. The goal posts have changed and what provided a safe retirement doesn't anymore. We are all at the mercy of the hedge funds and global markets.
    We are in a better position to advise our children than our parents were in advising us.
    Lark Force
    29th May 2019
    1:52pm
    Rosret you are right, my folks never even had a bank account. Had no idea of saving. It was all hand to mouth.
    Anything bought was on the never never, or lay-by. Hence my concern for the up and comers.
    About those goal posts. Not only are they closer together, they are now up in the grandstand!
    And any changes to Superannuation should be Grandfathered, not like that 2017 rip off by Smokin' Joe the biggest leaner that ever was.
    Anonymous
    29th May 2019
    3:50pm
    Just a clarification, Lark Force, Hockey resigned from Treasury on 21/9/2015.
    Captain
    29th May 2019
    4:34pm
    Old Man, the budget of 2014/15 was when the Asset Test changes were flagged to be implemented on 01/01/2017, and Hockey was the Treasurer who delivered that budget. As Lark Force said, "Smokin' Joe the biggest leaner".
    GeorgeM
    29th May 2019
    4:37pm
    Now, now, Old Man, don't do such cover-ups. The 2017 Asset changes were designed by that bastard Hockey under Abbott (who broke the "no pension changes" and other promises). However, as Abbott / Hockey were replaced by Turnbull / Morrison in Sep 2015, the actual change was passed through parliament in late Sep 2015. So, Hockey was the key culprit / leaner (along with Abbott), whereas Turnbull & Morrison also share the blame for carrying it though.
    Not a Bludger
    29th May 2019
    1:28pm
    Yet another biased report from the rentseeking AIST which is wholly controlled and funded by industry super funds which are, in turn, controlled by union thug bosses who, in turn, sit on industry fund boards and draw eye watering board fees.
    I do not know why YLC regularly publishes such reports without any critical analysis, comparisons or opinions.
    Readers should not be fooled by self-serving, self-interest reports such as this from AIST et al.
    Tom Tank
    29th May 2019
    1:51pm
    You cannot help yourself "Not a Bludger" can you. Your post is yet again full of nonsense as you cannot prove anything you have written in your latest tirade.
    Perhaps you are the CEO of one of the big Super Funds so criticised in the Banking Royal Commission.
    Then again perhaps you are totally ignorant about how all Super Funds MUST obey the rules and regulations laid down. I am surprised that given the level of your totally erroneous posts that you haven't been blocked from this site.
    I suppose that if that was done you would probably change your name and continue trying to fool readers.
    Tom Tank
    29th May 2019
    1:51pm
    You cannot help yourself "Not a Bludger" can you. Your post is yet again full of nonsense as you cannot prove anything you have written in your latest tirade.
    Perhaps you are the CEO of one of the big Super Funds so criticised in the Banking Royal Commission.
    Then again perhaps you are totally ignorant about how all Super Funds MUST obey the rules and regulations laid down. I am surprised that given the level of your totally erroneous posts that you haven't been blocked from this site.
    I suppose that if that was done you would probably change your name and continue trying to fool readers.
    Mootnell
    29th May 2019
    5:20pm
    industry funds according to Canstar outperform retail funds every time and from personal experience we agree. So you fall for rhetoric and want union representation out!! You are obviously ignoring every fat cat non union retail manager. Now no did they get rich?
    BraveArrow
    29th May 2019
    1:55pm
    It seems that there is a lot of money in the superfunds in Australia. However, it appears that the main beneficiaries are the retail fund (managers) and financial managers as the fees are too high (or rather ridiculous), it is too complex for most people to navigate through (including the reporting) and they make it difficult to change or consolidate funds.
    And the government (public service) are constantly meddling with contributions, taxes on contributions, taxes on payouts, etc. making it even more confusing.

    Perhaps, we should take a leaf out of the Singapore government CPF (Central Provident fund) that is relatively straightforward with the benefit mainly to the the public and has been successful in providing for the needs of the aged/retirees and even first home buyers (a portion of money accumulated in the CPF may be used for deposits/downpayments). Or are we Australians too proud to learn from others.
    Tom Tank
    29th May 2019
    2:43pm
    Unfortunately we are under the control of those who would consider a government run scheme such as that as Communism, or at least Socialism. As we have seen with the drive to privatisation of all government bodies who only work for the for the of businesses that buy them. The ordinary Aussie pays the price.
    Tom Tank
    29th May 2019
    2:43pm
    Unfortunately we are under the control of those who would consider a government run scheme such as that as Communism, or at least Socialism. As we have seen with the drive to privatisation of all government bodies who only work for the for the of businesses that buy them. The ordinary Aussie pays the price.
    TREBOR
    29th May 2019
    2:45pm
    2 TRILLION

    https://www.finder.com.au/australian-superannuation-funds-hold-2-trillion

    That's why it needs to be kept away from grasping hands on all sides.... and taken under control by a fully independent body that will do the job as intended... or face the axe.
    TREBOR
    29th May 2019
    2:52pm
    That's also why many hold well-founded fears that government will take it over the same as they did the original Pensions fund, and resolve it into 'consolidated revenue' - solve all their problems, and pay themselves a handsome dividend at the same time while preserving their own stolen Future Fund in the Bahamas and far from the disaster they wreak at nearly every turn.

    To set up that Stolen Future Fund - $139Bn - Howard paid some party favourite chick and a couple of others handsomely, then rewarded her with yet another lifetime earner off the public tit, and put his mate Peter Costello in charge of it to draw salary for life while pulling his mega government super for life indexed and discussing how to tell the peasants to eat cake.
    TREBOR
    29th May 2019
    2:53pm
    Sorry - that was only $130Bn - the nine was a mis-hit.. (LMAO) ...
    Ahjay
    29th May 2019
    2:16pm
    Financial literacy should be a subject taught to all school children so they can make informed decisions for their lifetime.
    I left school at age 13 and that's when my real education started. I wasted money on real estate investments, traded the share market brought new cars and boats. What a waste of time and money!
    I was fortunate enough to be involved in a Provident Fund managed by a very smart board who passed on some of skills in money management to me.
    Due to a family tragedy I spent many years moving around the country looking for rehabilitation and care for our son,often taking lower paid jobs to survive. I was age 62, our son was in 24/7 care with a wonderful group of carers and well settled.
    I was looking at my super balance of $12,000 and wondering about retirement in 3 years time. I decided to go back to my former line of employment, a job that I loved, and build my super. Having lived a frugal life, I had adjusted to living within my means and was able to contribute more to my superannuation. I worked on till age 75, and, had built up to over $500,000. I had placed my trust in an industry fund,Invested in Australian and International shares and hung on for the ride through all the ups and downs taking the market average.
    I am currently in retirement, drawing 6% plus a part Gov. pension and my fund has increased by 12%.
    I hold three ASX Exchange traded funds, Being, VGS VAS and VHY. Plus I hold 3 years income in Diversified Fixed Interest (bonds) to see me through the inevitable market when it comes. When will it come? Maybe tomorrow, maybe in 10 years. Nobody can predict it. Smart people will know only after the event.

    I have read many good books on investment and in my opinion, the very best of them were Motivated Money, by Peter Thornhill , and The Little Book of Common Sense Investing,by John C Bogle.
    It never ceases to amaze me that the vast majority of Australians will spend an entire working lifetime trying to accumulate a retirement income but will not spend two weeks to educate themselves to do their own investments. This laziness opens them up to the "Rent Seekers", Being active fund managers and Investment "Advisers",Who between them, will often soak up 50% or more of the returns, which are not fully disclosed in the fees.
    Cowboy Jim
    29th May 2019
    3:34pm
    Congratulation! I had financial education starting in primary school so was lucky in a way. Often wondered about people here being so ignorant about money matters and I agree with you, Ahjay, about school children being taught about financial affairs from a young age.
    Captain
    29th May 2019
    4:51pm
    My parents came up through the Depression and the Second World War, now they were hard times. My father gave me two pieces of financial advice,

    1: don't live beyond your means and

    2: look after the pennies and the pounds will look after themselves.

    I took his advice when I first started work at age 16. Now retired as a SFR and loving life.

    I started my children's financial education when they were 4 years old. Simple stuff that became more complex as they got older. They both own their own homes (with a small mortgage) and understand financial matters. What they don't know or need further clarification on they ask me or the Financial Planner that I have known for more than 40 years.

    After leaving school at 16 and finishing my apprenticeship I decided that I needed to know more about financial matters so I went to Uni at night to gain an Accounting Degree (at my own expense). It can be done by most people, they just need the motivation or someone to point them in the right direction.
    Ahjay
    29th May 2019
    5:25pm
    Life wasn't meant to be easy as a former Prime Minister told us. I started school during WW II. A thee mile walk through the bush, top up the energy with a glass of warm milk at a friendly dairy farm . Same in the afternoon on the way home . I certainly got my exercise.
    roy
    29th May 2019
    7:52pm
    Captain, a 3rd piece of financial advice, never vote labor.
    Captain
    29th May 2019
    9:11pm
    Roy, don't vote Liberal or Labor! !!
    Cowboy Jim
    29th May 2019
    3:13pm
    Maybe the future is a pension fund, compulsory for everyone where employees pay in a certain %age of income and the employers pay a higher %age. You have your years of paying in - say 45 and never mind how much you paid in the old age pension remains the same once you are 65. So millionaires get it but low paid workers get it as well. In my old place the pension currently is about $A3200 a month. You have to declare that in your tax return as well. But now there is the clinch - only people who survive past 65 years get any benefits and there is no residue left behind for heirs to benefit. Your partner of course has the same benefit never mind how much they earned. That is the way the system can be sustained for people getting really old. The way things stand here with super it shows me a vehicle to save money for the family members not necessarily for the people concerned. Possibly the reason every family man puts all his surplus money into his house because that can be passed on to children without inheritance tax.
    I wish I would have stayed in my old pension fund but with the Social Security Agreement signed with Australia in the 70s I was told to stop because Australia would pay my pension from the time past 65. Hawke/Keating changed the rules in the 80s and the pension became welfare. Was too old to rejoin the old system, so I was dudded big time.
    Rae
    29th May 2019
    4:49pm
    Maybe not Cowboy. The old systems were very expensive as your income increased. People ended up paying up to 50% or so of income towards the end and just to miss out on the $36 000 aged pension and concessions. No residual for the kids either.

    Accumulating wealth in a home, just saving the maximum allowed and security in a good pension is a real gift.
    Cowboy Jim
    29th May 2019
    6:07pm
    The op rate today is still only 9% for worker and 12% for employer and one only missed out if one died before 65. Mind you, universal pensions mostly do not know concessions for pensioners overseas, apart from some transport and cinema rebates.

    29th May 2019
    3:13pm
    So, we have another biased discussion in this forum. Presenting an article from one group with vested interests in one side of the discussion without presenting any input from the other side is what has now become expected on this site. Aren't there any reporters here who can research a subject and present both sides?
    roy
    29th May 2019
    3:39pm
    Old man,you really must pay attention to what MICK states, he is after all a "wiz" kid.
    Mike Omment
    29th May 2019
    3:53pm
    No , not on this site im afraid
    Not a Bludger
    29th May 2019
    4:42pm
    Now, now Tom Tank, Mick to name just a few as well as all you other moaners and groaners.
    Why do you not have a look at an outfit, Industry Fund Services which via Industry Super Holdings (plus a number of other entities)is/are wholly owned by various industry super funds - and thereby avoid any legislative requirements/ scrutiny as to their activities.
    And this is where swags of Industry Super Fund members’ funds are deployed - miles away from scrutiny.
    And, please have a look at the directors, one of which is Chloe Shorten - just another one living high on the hog on industry fund Members’ money.
    Just like all the other union bosses - and what about their wives and girlfriends.
    roy
    29th May 2019
    6:47pm
    I would love to know how Shifty Shorten is worth ,according to Google,$61 million. Where did that champagne socialist get that from. Another hypocrite friend of MICK, sheesh.
    Paddington
    29th May 2019
    9:03pm
    roy, you are a nasty bully and one that we have seen on here under other guise. Totally uncalled for aiming at Mick when there is no need as you are not responding to a comment of his.
    If we are sore losers what does that make you, a sore winner?
    4b2
    29th May 2019
    4:43pm
    Looks like not for profit funds (industry funds) perform better than retail funds. Similar conclusion found in the royal commission. So why is the coalition looking at another investigation into super funds?
    Are they still running a protection racket for their mates at the big end of town???
    Ahjay
    29th May 2019
    5:04pm
    Apparently.
    They also said they they would implement all reccomendations from the royal commission. Surely they wouldn't lie about that as well.
    roy
    29th May 2019
    7:51pm
    Ask Shifty Shorten and Chloe comrade 4b2.
    Paddington
    29th May 2019
    9:05pm
    roy, I am calling you out again. Chloe is none of your business. This is unacceptable.