Budget 2017: how does it affect you?

Today Treasurer Scott Morrison delivered his much-anticipated Budget.

Budget 2017: how does it affect you?

Today Treasurer Scott Morrison delivered his much-anticipated Budget 2017/18 and YourLifeChoices was in the Budget Media Lock Up to enable us to report on the changes that matter most for retirees.

As you can imagine, there’s quite a bit to digest so tomorrow we will share a detailed analysis of the measures that are most likely to affect affordability in retirement.

In the interim, here’s a wrap up of the items that we believe you need to know:

Age Pension

  • changes to Age Pension portability, which would have seen Age Pension payments subject to the Work Life Residency Rule six weeks after the recipient left the country, have been scrapped
  • Pension Concession Cards will be reinstated to those who lost their Age Pension eligibility as a result of the 1 January 2017 asset threshold changes
  • residency requirements will increase for those looking to claim an Age or Disability Support Pension


Medicare

  • a Medicare Guarantee Fund will be established from 1 July 2017 to ensure the ongoing funding of Medicare
  • the freeze to Medicare Benefits Schedule payments to GPs will be lifted from 1 July 2017 onwards
  • changes to the bulk billing incentives for pathology and diagnostic imaging have been scrapped, meaning patients should pay less for these services.
  • funding of new or amended listings on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme to give more affordable access to medicines


National Disability Insurance Scheme

  • introduction of a 0.5 per cent increase to the Medicare Levy from 1 July to ensure funding of the National Disability Insurance Scheme


Housing affordability

  • ability to salary sacrifice up to $30,000 into superannuation for first home buyers, which can be withdrawn to fund home deposit
  • encouragement for those over 65 years of age who downsize their home to make a non-concessional super contribution of $300,000 ($600,000 for couples)
  • incentives to fast-track building of new, affordable housing
  • incentives for investors in affordable housing


Banking

  • banks with liabilities greater than $100 billion to pay a levy that will be used to support budget repair

What do you think? Is this a Budget that will help ordinary retirees? Is there anything you think is important that has been overlooked?





    COMMENTS

    To make a comment, please register or login
    mogo51
    9th May 2017
    9:01pm
    At first look it seems like a 'going forward' budget where the coalition have finally started to consider working Australians.
    Anonymous
    10th May 2017
    9:58am
    Do you really honestly think that. What about struggling working people who are forced into paying 2.5% medicare levy plus forced to be in a private health fund they are paying high taxes as well as the levy and private health, they cannot possibly be in front.
    Anonymous
    10th May 2017
    5:00pm
    I read that people on $22,500 a year will cop a tax increase while those earning $1 million a year will get a tax cut. Doesn't sound much like a ''going forward budget where the coalition have finally started to consider working Australians'' to me.
    Anonymous
    11th May 2017
    9:18am
    Also the banks will pass their tax on to all of us.

    9th May 2017
    9:07pm
    I noted ongoing pressure on older (retired) home owners to 'down-size'. The issue is this - a n older home owner may sell their existing property and then place up to $300k into their existing superannuation fund, which would perhaps net that person, at a 5% return, an extra $6000 a year, or (round figures) $231 a fortnight

    On the other hand a pensioner who invested $300k in a bank at a deemed rate of 5% (LMAO) would raise therefore extra income of (round figures) $231 a fortnight, which would mean that pensioner would lose around $30 a fortnight due to pension reduction = $201 a fortnight (approximately).

    Bureau of Second Class Retirees, put your hand up!

    So those 'with' once again get more than those 'without' - sick, sick, sick, and a blatant attempt to reduce the Social Security budget (discussed under the headline of 'welfare', but listed in expenditure as Social Security - eat it - read the definitions of these two different things)...

    Cut off people for not attending job interviews... well .. how does that give them money to attend job interviews? Cut them off for four weeks - how does that give them any incentive to go to an interview?

    What's next - 'showed up dressed in unsuitable attire'.... wot? On $253 a week unless it's been chopped to save the Guv a few bucks, you expect me to show up in a suit with briefcase, or in full safety gear and uniform for a lolly pop man job on the highway?

    Point is - bring in a 'rule' and how long before it is extended? (not long)...

    Chop off pensions for those who caused it ENTIRELY by their own (mis) actions, such as drug or alcohol abuse.... hmmm... that leads us to the Orson Carte argument.. or was it the Carton Orse? Or is that the Chicken Anegg, or Eggan Chicken? (would you like fries with that?)....

    How many mentally disabled or disadvantaged people turn to drugs and/or alcohol?

    I note that at the same time as this is being set in place for non-service disabilities, the onus has been partially reverted away from that for Veterans and Ex-Service personnel... who now do not need to prove AS MUCH that the issues they are dealing with are solely service related ... now I by no means criticise that last and indeed applaud it - but once again... hands up the Bureau Of Second Class Citizens...... please step forward and identify yourselves and then justify your position.....
    MICK
    9th May 2017
    11:06pm
    Yes I thought the $600,000 into super sounded a bit hollow. The sums will be done on that in the next weeks I dare say. And remember that the big big national super nest egg is attracting governments of all persuasion and in time a government will nationalise this to gets its greedy hands on some of the loot. Who in their right mond would want more than a very few dollars in super. It's a time bomb waiting to be set off.
    Not a real lot for retirees from what I could see. More smoke and mirrors for this group.
    Anonymous
    10th May 2017
    5:18pm
    Nothing to suggest that extra $300,000 in super will be excluded from assets test, so what's the benefit? You downsize and lose pension benefits or you retain your more costly home and get a higher pension.
    tisme
    9th May 2017
    9:15pm
    so theres no more bulk billing pathology services ??
    KB
    9th May 2017
    9:31pm
    Bulk billing remains.GPS will be encouraged to bulk bill if they want to
    Anonymous
    9th May 2017
    9:37pm
    Removing a 'freeze' is like Affirmative Action - one the 'insiders' have been set in place, this becomes 'normal' and so is impossible to remove without a major excision of the cancer....

    Same with the punishment handed out by the Libs for the refusal of the $7 co-payment - they froze the rebates, the doctors responded by charging full price in most cases, and now the docs will not go back.

    Why should they when they have become accustomed to 'normal' earnings and there will always remain the fear that they are being sucked in for another chop? Full fee is now 'normal' and without massive excision of this cancer, will kill the patients...

    THAT is always the problem with half-baked policy ideas.... they cause lasting harm to many with no measurable benefit apart from to a few.
    LiveItUp
    10th May 2017
    6:47am
    Everyone should be required to pay a co payment to stop all the unnecessary medical servicing. GP wanted me to see her recently but I said no nothing aches and why should she get paid $300 and I get to waste my time unpaid waiting to see her.
    Anonymous
    13th May 2017
    1:34am
    'unnecessary medical servicing'? What planet do you live on?

    You pay your GP $300? What planet do you live on?

    I'm on the verge of oesophagus and bowel inspection - no cost.

    Looking also at cardiac intervention for a faulty valve (maybe)... might end up as open heart.....

    It'll take a while for the gougers to get $300 from me - but then - I suppose you feel that kind of medical attention is 'unnecessary'....

    On the other side - what would you do without me to keep you on the straight and narrow?
    LiveItUp
    13th May 2017
    8:36am
    Medicare pays my GP $300 A visit. I pay nothing. Check your mygov Medicare records and you will see how much your doctors are getting for your free treatment.
    johnp
    9th May 2017
    9:37pm
    Am I missing something?
    Re
    "Place up to $300k into their existing superannuation fund, which would perhaps net that person, at a 5% return, an extra $6000 a year"" - 5% of $300K
    I thought that would be an extra $15000 a year ?
    MICK
    9th May 2017
    11:08pm
    Not Christmas yet John.
    Rosret
    10th May 2017
    4:07am
    hehe NET. They want you to compound your savings to draw down on it in future years.

    They seem to forget that the home that has been so carefully preserved is the best inheritance we can give the next generation for their superannuation. That family home can mean the next generation is not begging for the government pennies in retirement.
    If you think our generation is short of super funds - wait for our kids reaching retirement. Poor guys, they will have next to nothing.

    It really just seems they want to be one step closer to throwing oldies out of their homes - no matter how humble to make way for "growth".

    It reminds me of when the crofter's homes were destroyed in Scotland and they were forcibly extracted from their land and sent to Australia. They just haven't got anywhere to send us except 6 foot under.
    Ted Wards
    10th May 2017
    9:41am
    Rosret the generations following you have theoretically put aside their super nest egg through years of hard work, I'm one of those. Plus people are now more portable in their work and don't necessarily live in the same place for years. They also don't necessarily want the burden of maintaining a home with a garden etc. You should enjoy the fruit of your labours, downsize and enjoy the rest of your life. I am sure children all over if they have worked hard and saved, would rather see you enjoy these years.

    The Government is looking at the wrong areas to recoup money. They should be looking at religious bodies who pay no taxes and the big businesses. Looking to make the vulnerable pay for the Governments cowardice is never a solution.
    Trees
    10th May 2017
    10:59am
    I agree with Ted Wards, downsizing is a good idea if you are not wanting to garden or otherwise use your quarter acre. You can start gifting your children money within the confines of the tax laws now, you don't need to wait until you die to help your children out if that's what you want to do.
    Now that SGC by employees is in place & your kids have the option to salary sacrifice (tax free) then if they manage things properly they will be fine. If your kids fritter away their opportunities then they will struggle - the choice is theirs.
    Go enjoy your retirement, you worked hard to get where you are, enjoy it.
    Anonymous
    10th May 2017
    5:07pm
    Start gifting to your children, Trees? At the rate of a massive $30K over 5 years. And that even includes paying for a meal or buying the grandkids a Christmas and birthday gift. What a joke! Precisely how long is it since that limit was increased?
    Old Geezer
    11th May 2017
    11:32am
    Just have the solicitor write cheques for the difference in the name of the kids. No money goes into your account and Centrelink doesn't care if you swap one house for another. No gifting rules apply.
    Anonymous
    13th May 2017
    1:39am
    Thank you, johnp, for pointing out my error.

    All that means is that a person on OAP will lose a hell of a lot more from pension by downsizing and putting cash into an account of any kind..

    Pretty obvious even to the casual observer what the true intent of this 'policy thrust' is....

    You'd have to be born yesterday to not see where this one leads.....

    Draw down every asset of the older person, until they have nothing, and draw them down so they cannot hand on any security to their future generations... while those with a heap will do that with ease.

    Would you like fries with that?
    Anonymous
    13th May 2017
    1:42am
    Ted - theory is a wonderul thing - but in view of the constant panicked changes to super so far by this insane lot - what guarantee do YOU offer that future generations, with massive and entrenched un- and under-employment as a way of life - will have any super at all?

    Sorry - I'm happy to pass on whatever I have to my beloved children and my beloved grand-children. If they have extra at the end of the day - that will not even remotely compare with what those who are designing this concept will have.

    You ever see one of those cats retire with nothing?
    LiveItUp
    9th May 2017
    9:38pm
    Time to buy a bigger country estate and sell the banks me thinks.
    NGE
    10th May 2017
    12:54am
    I agree Bonny. Time to UPSIZE my home not DOWNSIZE and then i can draw the full pension.
    Anonymous
    10th May 2017
    5:09pm
    Yep! That's what this IDIOTIC government is encouraging with their dumb assets test. At least they've addressed the pensioner concessions. Now they should wake up and reverse the assets test change, or better still introduce aged pensions for all and tax other income.
    Old Geezer
    11th May 2017
    10:15am
    Rainey they need to either give the concession card to only those on the full OAP or to everyone over 65 to stop all this manipulation of assets just to get the card.

    As it stands a retiree with money invested well can earn a lot of money tax free if they have it invested well so they don't need the OAP but will do anything to get that card.
    Anonymous
    11th May 2017
    11:03am
    Yes, those who CAN invest well can be well off and don't need government help. Those who CAN'T invest well, because of early deprivation or mental incapacity, and those with very high needs, are being punished for saving and left to struggle.

    The system is WRONG. I agree all over 65 should get concessions. Also, all over 65 should get the same pension, or else the pension should be income-tested only, with extra concessions for those with special needs. It is wrong to punish people for saving if they suffer disadvantage and are unable to enjoy high investment returns.
    Anonymous
    13th May 2017
    1:43am
    Tell ' er she's dreamin'....
    Chrissy L
    9th May 2017
    9:55pm
    I really don't think there was anything in this budget for pensioners/part pensioners/retirees. Maybe a little bit, if you want to downsize your home and value, but then your pension gets a hit or you may lose it completely, depending on how much money you have. You would need to factor that in. THIS GOVERNMENT JUST DOES NOT GET IT.
    They are being dragged kicking and screaming, adopting diluted policies of the Labor Government, along with putting the boot into the young people of our country by putting up Tertiary costs and reducing the time for them to pay it back to try and try to get some street cred to scrape back into Government. More attacks on the Welfare recipients. All whilst investors get a free ride on negative gearing and the top end of town continues to get richer. The Banks will pass on their increased costs to their customers to ensure their profits remain obscene. Debt has increased under this Government and future plans to surplus are all just "pie in the sky" forecasts. I think they are an insult to the intelligence of Seniors. Sorry Malcolm and Scotmo...I don't believe in Santa either!
    Alexii
    9th May 2017
    10:21pm
    I agree, Chrissy. It certainly seems to me that gov't will continue to support the wealthy and big businesses.
    MICK
    9th May 2017
    11:11pm
    Ditto.
    It's amazing what electoral disaster will do to any party.
    They are going to have to offer a lot more to get older Australians to sell up and leave their established network for a smaller house, probably in the burbs. Good luck with that one.
    wendan31
    10th May 2017
    2:43am
    What Government ever gets it when it comes to the aged pensioner, they sit in their office and look forward to their huge ongoing payouts when they leave parliament, never mind the old hard working pensioner that kept this country growing long before they entered office.
    Misty
    9th May 2017
    10:07pm
    Well I would say that if the random drug testing of Job Seekers is because they are funded by the Tax Payer, the Dole, then maybe the other people whose jobs are also funded by the Tax Payer, namely the politicians, should also be subjected to random drug tests too.
    Incognito
    9th May 2017
    10:48pm
    I agree, we don't want drunken drugged pollies running the country. Maybe time they cut their alcohol budget.
    Misty
    9th May 2017
    10:57pm
    Certainly their entertaniment allowance if they get one.
    MICK
    9th May 2017
    11:12pm
    I think you drug test those who are well understood to be on drugs. Not sure pollies are in that category.
    Rosret
    10th May 2017
    4:15am
    If you deny a drug addict dole bludger subsistence money they are going to commit more crimes. More crimes will increase our insurance premiums.
    Is this really worth the cost??

    Oldies, the disabled, the injured, the sick are usually on a vast concoction of drugs - I wonder how that would work.
    LiveItUp
    10th May 2017
    6:37am
    Time to drug test all those on welfare including OAP. There would be very few not on some kind of prescription drugs which are no different than any other drug. All drugs including prescriptions ones are poisons and should be included in this testing.
    ex PS
    10th May 2017
    9:33am
    Exactly what O.G would say Bonny, its almost like he was on the site.
    Liverpool Anne
    10th May 2017
    10:04am
    I remember a doctor at one of Perth's major hospitals doing research into how much alcohol reduced the brain. Particularly in executives with their lunchtime meetings.
    She proved that it did diminished the brain, and she was going on to research at what point would the brain not rejuvenate. I retired long before that finished, so I don't know the answer.
    However, the pollies enjoy cheap meals and cheap good wines in the parliamentary dining room. So what chance are we getting of good government from them after a session.
    About time they were tested for alcohol and drugs.
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    10:29am
    I think people should be drug tested a lot more as there are way too many people on drugs that are a danger to every one else especially on our roads. Many people are also too tired to drive as well.
    Trees
    10th May 2017
    11:09am
    Bonny that's a slippery slope - drug test welfare recipients for prescriptions drugs - sure hope you aren't on an poison prescription drugs they might start drug testing pensioners & then where would you be? Don't know too many elderly people not on some sort of prescription drug to stay alive.

    I can't believe you really want to waste more tax payers money on drug testing every beneficiary for prescription drugs.
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    11:30am
    Why not as they are a danger on our roads especially if they drive? I have nearly run over lots of old people who have no idea where they are as they are so drugged up. Not to mention those idiots on mobility scooters because they are no longer able to drive. They do such stupid things. One was driving up a major highway in the middle lane and couldn't see a thing as he had a frosted up rain shield over it as well. He was nothing but an accident waiting to happen. Pedestrian crossings are another problem as they just don't stop or look before they drive their scooter out a about 10 times walking pace. The number of people run over by them in nursing homes is mind boggling too.
    Misty
    10th May 2017
    11:39am
    What sort of a person are you Bonny to demand OAP be drug tested because they are on prescribed medicine?, you and OG were made in the same mould and I am wondering now if you are one and the same person, SHAME ON YOU. A few of the politicians themselves have said all workforce members should be drug and alcohol tested, pollies, Public Servants and even Journalists who go into Parliament House.
    Trees
    10th May 2017
    11:44am
    Why not Old Geezer because then they have to find the money to do the drug testing & those poor elderly people have to go to a centre to be tested which means they are on the footpaths or on the road on their mobility scooters - a danger to you.
    You intolerant old geezer - did you ever stop to try & assist any of these elderly people you have witnessed as a danger to themselves?
    I would have as a guess you would be an arrogant driver, just voicing my opinion with no facts - as you seem to do continually.
    You on any prescription drugs old geezer? go have a drug test then & then you will be able to scream how you are being victimised.
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    12:14pm
    They can drug test me all they like I haven't got a problem with it at all. I don't take any of those poisons and I am much better off for it. If you think prescriptions prolong life then it's not the pills but mind over matter.

    I'm too busy keeping out of the way of these people to stop and help them. If I stop they will run into me. I've lots count of the number of times I have had to take evasive action. If they are not allowed to drive a car then why are they allowed to drive these? Just accidents waiting to happen.
    Trees
    10th May 2017
    12:28pm
    Good for you using mind over matter & no pills - all credit to you OG.

    Of course you are too busy to help other people, I can tell from your demeanor you are far to important & busy buzzing around in your car in the right hand lane to lend a hand to your fellow man.

    I hope when you get to the same point as "these people" & you need help, that someone with a heart will lend you a helping hand & no aim for you on the pedestrian crossing.
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    4:06pm
    I'm more concerned about hurting myself when they do unpredictable things and cause me to fall off my push bike. Car is OK as they will come off a lot worse than me.
    Trees
    10th May 2017
    4:25pm
    you are such a caring old bugger OG, of course its all about you
    ex PS
    11th May 2017
    7:49am
    So many close calls O.G, are you quite sure it is everyone elses fault? Have you been tested and found competent lately? Maybe you are "one of those people", they are often the last to know.
    Alexii
    9th May 2017
    10:27pm
    The part of budget that says all Australians will pay an increased Medicare levy. Again it seems to me that it will certainly apply to the ordinary workers who don't have heaps of tax lurks and perks, but what about the very wealthy who have all those lurks and perks so that they legitimately minimise their taxable income. They will still not pay their fare share of the Medicare levy. What about those millionaires,we read about recently, who pay no tax and no Medicare levy.

    What about government taxing big corporations so they pay their fair share of taxes. As well ensure that big mining companies pay decent sized royalties and ensure they pay tax on their profits instead of avoiding it by their various schemes. If government were to ensure these businesses paid these taxes our country would have little or no problems at all.
    Misty
    9th May 2017
    10:32pm
    The Govt won't do any of the things you advocate here Alexi, they are the Coalitions biggest supporters so the Coalition won't do anything to upset them will they.
    MICK
    9th May 2017
    11:15pm
    There was a provision for collecting tax from multinationals but this is a bit of a joke. Recently the ATO won a case against Google who was being charged 7% interest the parent company in the US loaned the Australian arm when Google was only actually paying 1.2%. The courts let them claim 4% on their tax. A better deal for our tax system but still a rort and I do not understand WHY the actual rate was not enforced.
    Multinationals seem to be a protected species and most will still use their offshore tax shelters to avoid paying tax. THAT IS THE ISSUE TO FIX.
    Rosret
    10th May 2017
    4:17am
    Not sure how you can avoid the 0.5 increase unless you don't pay tax. Private insurance is crippling at the moment so its getting more expensive in all directions.
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    10:49am
    You can earn a lot of money in this country without paying any tax.
    Misty
    10th May 2017
    11:41am
    If you are one of them OG , that is cheating, as bad as Dole Bludgers.
    Trees
    10th May 2017
    11:46am
    Nice one Misty :)
    Boof
    9th May 2017
    10:36pm
    If it's true that Oz spends 15 billion bucks a year on aliens, stranded over here from different countries & are not permanent residents or refugee's, SEND THE BASTARDS HOME & build more housing for Australians. & help aged pensioners.
    MICK
    9th May 2017
    11:17pm
    Putting Australians first has not been a high priority for governments in this country. The solution is to elect politicians who are not aligned with parties which behave like this.
    wendan31
    10th May 2017
    2:45am
    AGREE, AGREE, AGREE, get them out of the country, an airfare ticket home would be much cheaper and save this country BILLIONS.
    MICK
    9th May 2017
    11:02pm
    Sounds like a lot of Labor policy in that lot plus an election coming. Quite a turn around in 4 years and I guess the polls showing this government is terminal may have convinced this lot to pull their grubby little heads in. But tax cuts to the rich not touched and negative gearing, the honey pot for our wealthy citizens to prosper compliments of the taxpayer, untouched....which means housing shortages for genY will stay the same. It will be interesting to see what 'incentives' are offered for those who construct affordable housing.
    This appears to be a fair budget. Had this lot canned tax cuts for the top end this government may actually have gained the support to stop its demise.
    It will be interesting what happens from here on in. At the very least Joe Hockey will have chocked on his cigar as he leans on taxpayers for the big bucks for himself.
    Anonymous
    10th May 2017
    5:41pm
    question to our masked labor patsy, micky boy, just wondering where is tornado in your picture?
    Anonymous
    13th May 2017
    1:47am
    Come on, heemie - you can do better than that!
    Anonymous
    14th May 2017
    11:53am
    What's ''fair'' about it Mick? Tax increases for everyone earning above $22,000 a year. Bank tax that will be passed on. Tax cuts for the very wealthy. Ridiculous nonsense pretending to address housing crisis by giving the well off the chance to put money into super if they downsize, but of course no benefit there for pensioners. And this garbage about workers drawing down from super for a house deposit, but only if they can save enough that they have absolutely no need to do so!
    I can't find anything ''fair'' in it at all. Not a single thing. Certainly nothing that would win my vote, and I was a devout LNP supporter until recently.
    Anonymous
    14th May 2017
    11:56am
    And I forgot to mention bashing the unemployed and poor further. Drug testing? Yep. Address the SYMPTOMS, not the cause. Do these idiots ever stop to think WHY the poor resort to drugs and alcohol? Of course not. Because if they did they would have to admit that the cruelty of the privileged and gross social injustice is the problem they should be addressing - and the poor are not to blame for that. They are victims.
    LiveItUp
    14th May 2017
    10:22pm
    Better way is give everyone on welfare a card eith restrictions instead of cash in their bank accounts. Cash is a big part of the problem. No cash no money for drugs.
    Chrissy L
    9th May 2017
    11:15pm
    I have missed OG's comments tonight - must have gone to bed early or the timer on the TV turned off?
    NGE
    10th May 2017
    12:56am
    You bought a smile to my face Chrissy. No doubt OG will surface tomorrow unfortunately
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    9:56am
    Nope went out for half priced dinner at the club and won a couple of raffle prizes instead.

    Looks like the OAPs with their money in the bank are going to get less interest. Hardly any will pass the drug testing either.
    ex PS
    11th May 2017
    7:53am
    This may settle a long standing argument, if they start drug testing Pensioners it will prove that they are on Welfare, if they don't, it will prove what most people think, they are not.
    Anonymous
    13th May 2017
    1:49am
    Hilarious - Old Age Pensioners on drugs.. what difference does it make?

    Just goes to show how virulent and insane some of the poster here are... all kids by the sound of it,with not one ounce of brain among them.

    NOBODY could make such assertions and be for real.
    Pamiea
    9th May 2017
    11:28pm
    Looks ok to me and I can't see how it is going to affect me at all at this stage.
    Nanny "H"
    9th May 2017
    11:44pm
    Think OG must be reading about the Budget in his car.
    ex PS
    10th May 2017
    1:41am
    O.G promised us a doozy, and we got one.
    This budget could have come straight out of an ALP government. On the other hand it is good to see an incumbent government admit that it had got it all wrong and that it needed to put petty politics aside and adopt some of the oppositions strategies to get them back on track.
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    10:17am
    Too warm here to be reading about the budget in the car. I'd need the air con on which is a waste of fuel.

    Must admit though the budget has some real nasties in it if you dig deep.
    jemimapd
    10th May 2017
    1:14am
    Your initial comments on the budget are ok but still show the left wing bias that many of your articles show.
    I am 71. I have no superannuation fund. I am not retired. I am self-employed. I will never call myself retired. That is the call of a socialist who thinks the state owes them a living.
    Retirement age was set when age expectancy was much lower.
    Retirement age should be adjusted inline with actuarial tables.
    Allowance should be made for career type.
    Heavy physical jobs are hard on the body but a sedentary job may well record badly through lack of exercise. consideration should be made.
    ex PS
    10th May 2017
    1:38am
    I am retired, I don't and probably never will get a cent to support my retirement from the government. I am totally self funded, can you please explain to me how this is a socialist state of mind?
    I don't think you fully understand what socialism is and therefore I would assume you would not fully understand what left wing bias is.
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    10:21am
    No it's not socialist it is now a welfare country. Far too many on welfare and not enough doing the work to pay for those who won't work for whatever reason. I too will never retire even though I passed retirement age eons ago now. I can still do most of the physical hard work I could when a lot younger so why are physical jobs so hard on the body? That's just not true at all. It's more like mind over matter.
    Anonymous
    10th May 2017
    5:37pm
    Yet more evidence of your lying, OG. Elsewhere you claim to have all sorts of ailments and know what it is like to suffer chronic pain. Yet here you claim to still do physical hard work. Obviously you are just patently untruthful.
    Anonymous
    13th May 2017
    1:51am
    You prepared to offer a million jobs for life, with full super benefits etc, OG? And that's just to cater to the current unemployment figures, and leave a few left over...

    Thought not....

    Last election, Rudd offered a million jobs - Abbott beat him by offering two million and jobs and growth.....

    Neither made the grade....
    Blondie
    10th May 2017
    2:10am
    After this ' desperate to keep Malcolm in power' budget, you'd have to be an idiot to sell your large home, in order to put extra funds into your super! I've already started renovations on my inner city family home....
    Rosret
    10th May 2017
    4:25am
    Yes! Its our home and we need to make a stand.

    I wonder if the $300K is on top of the $540K limit. If so, why can't retirees continue contribute to their super if they wish and why MUST we draw down 4% per year on our super once we start to access the funds.

    Besides a 3 bedroom house in my area rents for $700 p.w. No need to sell - just rent another home in the back of Bourke and keep your asset.
    ex PS
    10th May 2017
    9:31am
    It is but it won't work, do you vote for the people who stole the good idea or those who came up with it in the first place.
    I applaud the government for admitting they got it wrong and changing tack, but I can not support them in stealing ideas and not giving the original thinkers the credit.
    Blondie
    10th May 2017
    2:10am
    After this ' desperate to keep Malcolm in power' budget, you'd have to be an idiot to sell your large home, in order to put extra funds into your super! I've already started renovations on my inner city family home....
    LiveItUp
    10th May 2017
    6:44am
    Another budget that punishes the workers and investors who are the engine room of society. Loks like any one with loans and money in the bank is about to get a haircut too. That levy on the banks is illegal and will be challenged in the courts.
    Rosret
    10th May 2017
    7:34am
    Actually it is rather a generous budget. The banks are the hardest hit.
    Anonymous
    10th May 2017
    10:04am
    The banks will pass this on to us.
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    10:09am
    Not if you are a worker or an investor with money in the big 5 banks. That NDIS is the biggest waste of money I have ever seen Gonski is just as bad.
    Slimmer Cat
    10th May 2017
    11:26am
    The people hardest hit in this (Labor style) budget are the FULLY self funded retirees with investments. NO matter which party is in power the FULLY self funded retirees are always hit hard.
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    11:44am
    The government should be looking after self funded retirees to encourage others. However they prefer to look after those who fail to become self funded retirees instead. Not good for the long term.
    Misty
    10th May 2017
    11:46am
    Don't be silly OG, of course the big 5 will pass on these costs, share holders and customers alike will end up paying one way or another.
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    4:03pm
    The board of each company (bank) has a fiduciary duty to do what’s best in the interest of its shareholders, not its customers.

    Therefore customers will lose not shareholders.
    Anonymous
    13th May 2017
    1:54am
    A fine argument for restoring the Commonwealth Bank to its former glory...

    10th May 2017
    7:42am
    Why do pension concession cards get given to former pensioners who lost the pension because they have too much they are plainly not entitled to anything as they have to much.
    Rodent
    10th May 2017
    8:06am
    Roby


    I suspect its all about getting some older ex pensioners back on side, and it will cost the Feds nothing in effect as the states will pay the costs. Purely a political decision, what a surprise.

    Make me wonder how Centrelink will be able to administer this anomolie, ie a person who has a PCC but does not receive a pension. Hope they have worked this out.

    All self Funded Retirees will not be amused, including OG
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    10:24am
    The pension card should only be given to those on the full OAP not to those who buy million dollar mansions and give the rest away just so they qualify for a dollar of OAP. It is just so unjust to other self funded retires who have less but get nothing.
    Slimmer Cat
    10th May 2017
    11:29am
    After this budget there will be many FULLY self funded retirees who will be far worse off than welfare recipients on the full OAP plus all the goodies that come with the card.
    Misty
    10th May 2017
    11:30am
    Envy raising it's head again OG, please give it a rest.
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    11:36am
    No Misty no envy just fairness which you seem to not understand.
    Anonymous
    10th May 2017
    5:27pm
    Slimmer Cat is right. Many self-funded retirees would be far better off having less savings and getting a pension. Lots will spend up big on luxury holidays or bigger houses because this IDIOTIC government and its selfish supporters have made it more beneficial to do that than to save.
    oxfordshire
    10th May 2017
    8:30am
    Have you missed the $75 one off payment for pensioners to assist with power bills?
    Chrissy L
    10th May 2017
    8:48am
    No Oxfordshire I haven't missed the $75 one off payment to help with Power costs. It will reimburse me for Seven and a half weeks of what this government has ripped off me as a Part Pensioner. Sorry, I am not excited about it. This is another con job by this government to try and scrape back into Government at the next election. The bottom line is that Part Pensioners and Retirees have been used as an easy target by this Government to reduce our Income in Retirement. I hope they all get thrown out at the next election they could easily get a job selling dodgy cars, they have the experience in buckets.
    oxfordshire
    10th May 2017
    9:33am
    Thanks Chrissy but I wasn't addressing my comment to you, rather making the point that the article summarising the budget omitted
    the $75 payment.
    Chris B T
    10th May 2017
    9:12am
    There is a Nominal Value for home couple home owners of $370k.
    This is madeup of the additonal assets allowed $200k and Rental assisttance (useing deaming rates).
    There are a lot of couples already at this Value of Home and way below.
    With this extra money and costs associatted with downsizing what real benefit other than change of location maybe, and smaller manageable home maybe will you receive.
    Frustration and confussion moving forward, really add to supper a non Government Guarantee Fund.
    It should be around $370k to match the Nominal Value as additonal non asset testing amount. Used freely, who's refunding the costs with down sizing and moving.
    Think Very Carefully about all the consequences as there is no Do Overs except by the Government where they will DO YOU OVER as many times they can.
    Mum
    10th May 2017
    9:24am
    Well I think the return of the pensioner concession card for those who lost their part-pension is great. If your assets were only just over the threshold, those extra payments, eg car registration and discounted council rates, were a concern.
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    10:03am
    I disagree. Only those on the full OAP should get the pension concession card. This wold stop a lot of people organising their affairs just to get a dollar in OAP. A very stupid move by the government giving the card to rich OAPs.
    Big Kev
    10th May 2017
    11:06am
    I disagree also but for the opposite reason. People with investment in million dollar plus homes get pension card. I'm a self funded retiree who receives $60 per fortnight over limit for pensioner concession card, my wife receives no income, we both have complex health problems. We have to pay full price at doctors and for medicines. I think we are more deserving of pension benefits card as we are far worse off than those who have been reinstated.
    Big Kev
    10th May 2017
    11:06am
    I disagree also but for the opposite reason. People with investment in million dollar plus homes get pension card. I'm a self funded retiree who receives $60 per fortnight over limit for pensioner concession card, my wife receives no income, we both have complex health problems. We have to pay full price at doctors and for medicines. I think we are more deserving of pension benefits card as we are far worse off than those who have been reinstated.
    Big Kev
    10th May 2017
    11:06am
    I disagree also but for the opposite reason. People with investment in million dollar plus homes get pension card. I'm a self funded retiree who receives $60 per fortnight over limit for pensioner concession card, my wife receives no income, we both have complex health problems. We have to pay full price at doctors and for medicines. I think we are more deserving of pension benefits card as we are far worse off than those who have been reinstated.
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    11:17am
    If you are classified as chronically ill then most doctors and specialists will bulk bill you. I get bulk billed for everything and I don't have a health care card all. I just don't get the prescriptions filled as I can't see the benefit in any of them.
    ex PS
    11th May 2017
    7:59am
    So O.g you don't take your medication, so your illness gets worse and the taxpayer has to subsidize your health care. Is there no end to the money soaked up by you people on welfare. And all because of your inability to manage your own health. You should hang your head in shame.
    KSS
    11th May 2017
    8:21am
    Why bother going to the GP in the first place OG if you neither respect their opinion or take the medication they prescribe. Seems to me medicare would be better off if you didn't attend and forego the bulk billing.
    Old Geezer
    11th May 2017
    2:41pm
    Most prescriptions are only written because people expect to get one. I've had doctors apologise to me for not writing me one. I manage my health very well by not taking those poisons. Remember every one you take you have to give back something in return as they all have side effects. I save the government and myself money by not getting those scripts filled. Also being allergic to many drugs it is a good chance if I do take them I will have to call an ambulance and spend a week or so in hospital. That costs Medicare big time.
    Anonymous
    13th May 2017
    1:57am
    Once again - OG is the problem and not the solution....

    Move on, people - nothing to see here.
    Shetso1
    10th May 2017
    9:49am
    Pleased they're going after the banks and NO the extra SHOULD NOT BE PASSED ONTO CUSTOMERS but taken from the OUTRAGEOUSLY BLOATED SALARIES OF BANKING CEOs and top banking executives.....Banks make millions in profit each year and its delicious to see them finally being reasonably slugged for their greed!!!!

    Don't agree with much of what Jacqui Lambie says but think she got it right when she says and I paraphrase 'Politicians need to lead by example - if people on welfare have to be drug tested so too must slimeball politicians and public servants who are also paid by taxpayers'....Hell it wasn't so long ago that politicians in one of their late night binge sessions were held accountable for a broken table or whatever and darn sure there's a few 'watering holes' or 'booze haunts' in Canberra where politicians and their hangers-onners drink the night away with taxpayer money pouring down the drain and don't give it a second thought....The only difference between people on welfare and federal politicians is that federal politicians are paid about 200 times as much as well as lapping up all their snouts-in-trough perks and privileges i.e. swanning around the country and overeseas on BS study tour junkets that has zilch to do with their electorates, use of government government cars, unnecessary travel expenses, accommodation, and restaurants etc. etc.

    God knows most politicians would have to be on either Prozac or Valium or some sort of substance to keep their narcissism under control...
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    10:04am
    It will be passed onto customers so that the shareholders don't lose anything. Way it should be too.
    Trees
    10th May 2017
    11:30am
    Shetso1 pretty well put, agree with most of what you have to say.

    Old Geezer what the heck are you saying? first you complain that the poor people are being penalised with this budget then you go on a & say the bank will pass cost onto customers & that's the way it should be??? That's the way it should be??? If you are a shareholder in one of the big banks I understand your comment, selfish though it would be, otherwise I am not sure you actually have any valid opinions & you are not just being contrary to every comment on here for something to do?
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    12:03pm
    Any business should put it's shareholder's interest before any one else's. I can't see any reason why the banks wouldn't do this.
    Trees
    10th May 2017
    12:07pm
    Old Geezer so you are all good with the banks passing it onto the customers - good to know
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    5:49pm
    The board of each company (bank) has a fiduciary duty to do what’s best in the interest of its shareholders, not its customers.
    ex PS
    11th May 2017
    8:03am
    O.G, if the banks pass the obligation to customers those with any sense will go to smaller banks or Credit Unions, and that will have an overall effect on shareholders. The banks make money from lending the depositors money to business at a higher rate than they pay them, reduction in money to lend means a cut in profit.
    Shetso1
    11th May 2017
    11:23am
    Amazed at how easily some are rattled by the GREED of these banks!!....Hell the power lies with the customers, if banks threaten to pass on these tax increases customers simply just remove your money from the banks and walk....Stuff your money under a mattress if necessary but don't allow yourselves to bullied by the greed of these people....

    Heard on the ABC Drum yesterday that some banking CEOs get a salary in the vicinity of 12 million dollars and upwards and by ANY measure this is OUTRAGEOUS OF EVERY LEVEL!!!!

    Cut the salaries of banking CEOs and top banking executives before anything else....Besides banks make annual profits in the multi-billions year after year surely a reasonable tax increase would be easily absorbed in such a profitable financial environment.....

    PLEASED THE GREED OF THESE CORPORATIONS IS BEING ADDRESSED AND THEY ARE BEING SLUGGED FINALLY...
    Old Geezer
    11th May 2017
    12:02pm
    The levy will be extended to all banks and finance institutions so It doesn't matter who you bank with.
    Anonymous
    13th May 2017
    2:00am
    Sounds like we need to tax shareholders a little more..... just to make up....

    I'm sure the OGs of this world would love that... maybe get rid of deemed taxes and tax them as individuals on income derived.

    I mean - it's pretty straight forward - the bank earns money, and pays tax... the individual earns money and pays tax - why should shareholders not pay for their income?
    clembo
    10th May 2017
    9:51am
    Why don't they tax all the brain washing organizations in australia e.g. ALL CHURCHES and RELIGIONS we won't have to worry about BUDGET problems anymore !!!!
    Anonymous
    10th May 2017
    10:33am
    Hit nthe nail on the head with that one.
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    10:36am
    I wish people would stop thinking they can buy their way to heaven as they are going to be very disappointed. If we had no religion we would have no wars.
    Trees
    10th May 2017
    11:36am
    Agree religious institutions should be taxed, totally should happen.

    Old Geezer another random blanket statement - no religion no wars?

    What religion is Donald Trump & Putin? - they are power & money hungry they are not instigating war for religion reasons.

    Hitler - religion - NO - he wanted power & to have a dominant race of perfect blue eyed blonde people - not religion.

    Way back it was religion not anymore - its power & money
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    12:00pm
    Look a little deeper Trees and you will see beyond the trees.
    Trees
    10th May 2017
    12:08pm
    Nope Old Geezer you tell me you give me some facts, back up your statement please
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    4:44pm
    All I'll say is that I wouldn't want to be of certain religions in either the US or Russia at present. Same as in Hitler's time.
    Liverpool Anne
    10th May 2017
    9:52am
    I wish the Government on both sides and worked together, the time spent berated each other would be better doing thing to benefit all Australians and the country. Too much time is used saying you pinched my ideas. One side comes up with a great idea, so the opposition cans it. GET IT TOGETHER AND WORK TOGETHER
    ex PS
    10th May 2017
    12:45pm
    Totally agree, a good idea should belong to everybody.

    10th May 2017
    9:56am
    Did I miss something there is no mention of the $75 that was going to be given to us in June to go towards our power bills, and if this is given will it be across the board to pensioners in warmer climates as they use their air conditioners all year round which is costing an absolute fortune especially in the NT. To me the budget has not helped one bit.
    Anonymous
    10th May 2017
    10:35am
    The budget is not there just to help bloody pensioners but for a lot more important things as well.
    Pensioners get more than enough .
    clembo
    10th May 2017
    3:58pm
    couldn't agree more Roby . The more tax you pay and the more successful you are gets you none of the generous payouts the pensioners get !!
    Anonymous
    13th May 2017
    2:02am
    Please explain, Roby - how pensioners get more than enough.... I'd love to hear.....

    If you benefit so well, clembo, you don't have any need for extra help, and you probably rorted your taxes along the way in one way or another.

    NOBODY is 'successful' without the input of others less paid.... pay your way or leave....
    Anonymous
    13th May 2017
    12:34pm
    I could extend this argument to include the reality that while ever some people are unable to get work, that is a direct benefit to those who have, and those who have are receiving more from this nation and society - therefore in the interests of fairness they should pay more.

    I like the idea of a super tax on super incomes - if you earn over $1m you pay 50% and then steadily more as your income from all sources and including fringe benefits, goes up. Say at $10m you pay 65% - still leave you with a heap.
    Grateful
    10th May 2017
    10:41am
    Let's not hyper analyse this budget. WE won't see any of the so called "growth" measures, but you can bet that most of it will pass the Senate. It is a purely populist clever trick to take away much of the Labor Party's ammunition for the next election, make the superficial voters delighted, hitting those bastard banks and dole bludgers and giving those cards back to the rich oldies who turned against them in the polls.
    We are going to definitely see a new under class of the most desperate getting nothing at all and it will be America at its worst. Many, if not most, to whom those new rules apply will simply not apply and can't you imagine where they will end up?
    And surely nobody thinks that the banks won't recoup all of that so called "levy" with increased charges and reduced dividends and blame "the government"!!! We will ALL have to pay that $6 billion in an economy that is already hugely over stretched.
    And how many houses will become "affordable" with those token gestures to first home buyers and "incentives" for oldies to downsize?
    PURE POLITICS and just wait for the ones pre the next election!!!!
    None of these "growth" plans will come in during this government's tenure and what about those Don Quixote dreams to return the budget to surplus IN 2021, all hypothetical!!!
    Let's get real and see right through this dishonest and disingenuous political trick. But many won't!!!
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    10:46am
    Agree you can't take money from the workers (engine room) and expect the economy to grow. Banks will just pass it on to their customers to keep their profits up.
    Rodent
    10th May 2017
    11:24am
    Grateful

    I tend to agree with much of what you have said, however I doubt the Rich Oldies you refer to who lost a significant % of the Pension and the PCC will be persuaded by the restoration of the PCC. Yes if they were polled they may have been a factor in the Govts thinking, but as I said before it was politically very easy to restore the PCC and no $ cost to Federal Govt(states pay) and it MAY keep voters on side.

    The FINE detail of this change is buried in the many supporting Social Security Docs that are part of Budget, just Google -Budget 2017/18 and up will come -Aust Govt Dept of HS and you will see all the DETAILS of all the changes in Social Security
    Misty
    10th May 2017
    11:51am
    Shareholders too will suffer OG, DON'T THINK THEY WON'T.
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    11:57am
    No shareholders will not suffer and this can be seen by the markets reaction today. Profits of the banks will increase and shareholders will benefit instead. I also not the rise in those banks outside the top 5 today. The market seems to be loving the budget.
    Misty
    10th May 2017
    1:22pm
    Sorry to inform you OG but I have been listening to Scott Morrison speaking at the NPC and David Spears, SKY NEWS Journalist, had a copy of a letter from one of the banks CEO'S to the employees telling them they would have to absorb the costs of the levy and it would affect customers and shareholders alike, maybe you are watching the Press Club Speec h too OG and already heard that.
    Trees
    10th May 2017
    2:28pm
    Misty, if that is going to be the case & banks customers are to take the pain then move from the big 5 banks.
    There are many options out there for online only banking institutions that don't charge fees. If you are savvy with online banking & EFTPOS cards then you should have no problem with online only unless you still rely on going into your local branch.
    Speak with your feet, close your accounts with the big 5, you have no loyalty to them, they have no loyalty to you - show them your disapproval by actually taking your business elsewhere.
    You have a voice so to speak you just have to use it.
    Trees
    10th May 2017
    3:14pm
    Just to clarify my statement of "online banking institutions don't charge fees"- if you choice your bank well & accounts correctly you will not pay fees. An example is ING Direct orange account, no atm fees, no monthly fees, of course there are criteria's to meet, such as deposit a $1,000 into the account each month. So deposit your pension & take out what you need for the month - no fees, no atm charges from any bank atm, at any time. And before you ask no I have no affliation with banking institution just wanted to back up my statement with facts people.
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    4:07pm
    Phew I'm glad you don't use ING as they have hidden fees everywhere.
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    4:10pm
    Misty if the bank's board does what was in that letter they can be sued by the shareholders for not acting in their fiduciary interest.

    The board of each company has a fiduciary duty to do what’s best in the interest of its shareholders, not its customers.
    Misty
    10th May 2017
    4:11pm
    Trees I do all my banking with 2 Credit Unions, exception is I have 1 Visa card with NAB.
    Misty
    10th May 2017
    4:15pm
    Well OG it wasn't just the one bank 2 more have come out and said the same thing, I think the govt should refuse to include the banks in the 25% business tax reduction they don't deserve it, the upper management could take a pay cut too some of those salaries are obscene.
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    4:23pm
    Well Misty they are opening themselves up to being sued by their shareholders if they do what they say. I'll even put it forward at the next shareholder's meeting.
    Trees
    10th May 2017
    4:34pm
    Good for you Misty Credit Unions are pretty darn good as well.
    As long as you pay your credit card off each month there are no fees on your purchases (with the exception of cash) so they are good back stop as well.

    Talking crap again Old Geezer sight some examples of these hidden fees with ING Direct for general banking, go on, dare ya, so far you haven't come back with any facts about the stuff you are spouting off that I asked you for. You know saying there are hidden fees doesn't make it so - well only in your mind I guess.

    You don't have to come back with an answer for the sake of an answer Old Geezer, only answer if you know what you are talking about.
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    4:40pm
    All I know is that I can get much better returns form the big 4 banks than I can get with ING or credit unions. Banks negotiate they don't.
    ex PS
    11th May 2017
    8:09am
    Yes don't you realize the banks obviously have no access to Risk Management Services or legal advice. They will act against the interest of investors and get themselves sued, because they are just dumb and know nothing about how companies run. If that is the case, why would anyone be stupid enough to trust them with their hard earned money.
    O.G, you should go round there and sort them out before they are all ruined.
    Old Geezer
    11th May 2017
    10:24am
    Looks like the legislation is going to be changed to a levy to be applicable to all liabilities of over $250,000 on all banks and others in operating in Australia. So credit unions too will have to pay this levy.
    Rodent
    10th May 2017
    10:48am
    Dear ALL

    If you want to get a better OVERVIEW ,and details of the Federal Budget the best place is Super Guide - May Newsletter just released last night- refer www.superguide.com.au
    johnp
    10th May 2017
    10:59am
    I am still missing something
    Re
    ""
    Place up to $300k into their existing superannuation fund, which would perhaps net that person, at a 5% return, an extra $6000 a year
    ""
    I thought 5% of $300K would be $15000 a year ??
    Trees
    10th May 2017
    11:57am
    hey johnp He said 'nett' so after tax the return would be around $6,000, which would kind of be about right on the tax scales today :)
    ex PS
    11th May 2017
    8:13am
    Tax at the rate of over 50% on money in a a Super Fund, has someone changed the Super Tax rules when I was asleep?
    Anonymous
    11th May 2017
    8:36pm
    Tax on a super fund in accumulation phase is 15%. It is NOT 50%. I wish people would know what they are talking about.
    Anonymous
    13th May 2017
    2:04am
    You obviously are missing the answer and the issue.....
    Anonymous
    13th May 2017
    2:07am
    WHY should a super fund owner get $300k single and $600k couple extra into a cash generating fund and earn more - and a person on pension put $300k single or $600k couple, and lose more than it's worth?

    Are there different grades of retirees? Are some 'better' than others and deserve better treatment to add to what they already have?

    No wonder some speak of 'class war'..... I speak of politics of division...and look at the foolishness of some posters here.... minds and intellects of sixteen year olds.... which they probably are, and trolling on a seniors forum as if they know everything.
    Chrissy L
    10th May 2017
    11:03am
    Oxfordshire....No worries
    BillF2
    10th May 2017
    11:41am
    At first glance, none of the measures will adversely affect politicians or their rich mates. Only the average mug punter. Even the banks will claw back what they have to pay. If politicians had had their wages and benefits reduced, the budget might have been more acceptable. The fact that governments contnually live beyond their means and are forever demanding more to try and keep up with their expenditure, only shows how incompetent they are at the job they profess to know so much about! And we pay them for it!
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    11:49am
    Those negative gearing changes will affect the pollies and their rich mates. So will the tax on unoccupied houses for foreigners.
    Anonymous
    10th May 2017
    5:30pm
    Dream on, OG. The effect will be minimal, and pollies will have left themselves and their mates another loophole to compensate. That's what greedy mongrels do.
    Anonymous
    10th May 2017
    5:31pm
    Dream on, OG. The effect will be minimal, and pollies will have left themselves and their mates another loophole to compensate. That's what greedy mongrels do.
    Anonymous
    10th May 2017
    5:31pm
    Dream on, OG. The effect will be minimal, and pollies will have left themselves and their mates another loophole to compensate. That's what greedy mongrels do.
    mike
    10th May 2017
    11:45am
    Well in England there was a chap called Robbing Hood who robbed the rich to pay the poor. In Australia we have the gang of 5, Hockey, the two Bishops, Abbott and Turnbull who robbed the middle class, the poor, the disabled, the pensioners to pay the rich and fill their back pockets at the same time. eg, Hockey rorted the travel allowance not one, but SEVERAL multiples of $288 a night to pay for his Canberra mansion that he bought through lying and cheating and was actually proud of if
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    11:47am
    Sounds like an OAP that whingers no matter what he gets to me.
    Misty
    10th May 2017
    11:54am
    It takes one to know one OG, you are the biggest whinger of the lot commenting on here.
    Trees
    10th May 2017
    12:04pm
    way to go Misty - hahahaha
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    12:09pm
    Ha ha I have nothing to whinge about not like some.
    Trees
    10th May 2017
    12:15pm
    oh but whinge you do Old Geezer
    Anonymous
    10th May 2017
    5:15pm
    Whinges constantly about people being supported by a caring society, and condemns all who need support while gloating about his own good fortune. One very sick puppy is OG. Oh, and he contradicts himself too. Can't recall his own lies. On the one hand he resents paying taxes to support people who ''didn't bother to save for old age'' and on the other hand he claims only high income earners could accrue $800,000.
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    5:51pm
    Well Rainey your battlers couldn't accumulate $800 let alone $800,000 otherwise they would simply not be battlers.
    Anonymous
    11th May 2017
    10:54am
    If that were true, OG, your remark that you resent paying taxes to fund OAPs for people who ''didn't bother to save for their retirement'' would show you as inhuman and thoroughly vile in every way, as well as totally illogical and completely STUPID.

    The simple fact is that you can't tell truth from fiction and you are far too arrogant and self-obsessed to know anything about anyone other than yourself, let alone about the world at large.

    Only a complete IDIOT would suggest that someone ceases to be a battler when, after 50 years of battling, they find their hard work and frugal living has resulting in them having a little savings nest egg. What a STUPID assertion.
    Old Geezer
    11th May 2017
    11:29am
    So I guess I am a battler then Rainey!
    Anonymous
    13th May 2017
    2:10am
    No - you are a bottler of trolls, OG......
    johnp
    10th May 2017
    11:54am
    old geezer has nothing to do and all day to do it in
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    11:58am
    OG comments while doing other things instead of useless things like knitting.
    Trees
    10th May 2017
    12:14pm
    Oh contraire Old Geezer - knitting is valuable talent, didn't your mother ever knit you a jumper to keep you warm? what things do you do that you can snare at the knitting fraternity? please share. Didn't you parents ever teach you it is rude to put other peoples talents down?
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    12:22pm
    I'm probably a better knitter than most so how am I putting people's talents down? No one knits today for the basics of life. it is just useless stuff that no one really wants.
    Misty
    10th May 2017
    12:30pm
    It may be news to you OG but many people still do knit for all manner of reasons,we have a group in my town that knit for a charity called WRAP WITH LOVE, they knit coloured squares that are then sewn together and given locally and overseas to needy people so please don't go around belittling people that knit, surely you haven't sunk that low?.
    Trees
    10th May 2017
    12:42pm
    oh doh with your statement "doing other things instead of useless things like knitting" - is not a put down????

    Another random statement nobody knits today & its useless stuff - I knit, sew & crochet - so does many of my family & we don't think its useless, recycling old knitted garments & making into blankets for the dog refuges is one thing we do, we still knit jumpers as well, fancy that then!? Knitting has made resurgence in the last few years, just some info for you there OG
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    3:59pm
    Still think people must not have anything better to do if they knit.
    AutumnOz
    10th May 2017
    4:22pm
    People still want hand knitted jumpers and other knitted garments, many specialty shops pay people to knit the garments so they can keep up with the demand.
    Another plus is that hand knit garments are long lasting and look much better than all those cheap imports that rub and pill in the first wash.
    Unfortunately I've left it too late to learn to knit.
    Trees
    10th May 2017
    4:38pm
    How about an apology for your disgusting put down to all the people who knit or wish they could Old Geezer? That was not a nice thing to say at all.
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    4:38pm
    Knitted jumpers are such a pain to wash so I don't use them any more.
    Misty
    10th May 2017
    10:47pm
    You don't know what you are missing OG, nothing is as warm as a pure wool jumper, well worth the little bit of extra care you need to give them.
    Old Geezer
    11th May 2017
    10:08am
    I rarely wear a jumper maybe a couple of days a year if that and a wool one would be way too warm for this climate. Today I am in a tshirt and shorts and have been since I got up at dawn.
    Anonymous
    11th May 2017
    10:57am
    OG, you would be far better off knitting than displaying your nastiness, arrogance and utter stupidity with your repeated idiotic and mean comments.
    Old Geezer
    11th May 2017
    11:24am
    Nope no knitting for me it's way too boring. Worse than mending socks.
    inextratime
    10th May 2017
    4:14pm
    Trebor. What Super funds are returning 5%. If they are change your Super fund account. 7%+ and upwards is what most are paying at the moment so your argument is flawed.
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    4:22pm
    My super fund is doing better than 5%. I also believe the average super fund return is over 5% too.
    Anonymous
    10th May 2017
    5:11pm
    Then the Treasurer must be inept because the government declares 5% return is the average.
    Anonymous
    13th May 2017
    2:13am
    **face palms** the top performing funds accrued 7.9% - the average is about 5%.. is that so hard when you simply make an estimate, and then use that to make a comparison?

    YOUR government does it all the time...... and is there any chance you might look at the issue raised, of the vast difference between someone already well-heeled putting a heap into a super fund, and a pensioner doing the same with a bank at the same %, and losing massively?

    OG - you don't HAVE super - it is too high risk for you - keep your stories straight....
    inextratime
    10th May 2017
    4:21pm
    Old Geezer = Superman on steroids. This forum is the greatest platform for some silly old people to carp on about how tough they are, how frugal they are, how financially savvy they are etc etc. Never mind that some people suffer from crippling arthritis or the aftermath of Chemo, damaged limbs, back problems etc etc. If you're not as lucky as good old OG then you don't deserve to live. Yawwwwwwwn.
    Old Geezer
    10th May 2017
    4:31pm
    Yep got all them things too but if you dwell upon them you are doing yourself a gross disservice. Remember I have had cancer twice with chemo, radiation and other nasties.

    In fact I have to have an operation on my arm next week but that's just part of getting old. A bit of discomfort but I'll be back to normal in no time.

    Nothing fixes back problems like a good roll around on the floor. Got caught once rolling around on the laundry floor of a caravan park as my back was aching a bit. It was too wet outside and that was the only place with enough room.

    Remember pain is in the brain so all you have to do is stop the brain recognising the pain.
    Anonymous
    14th May 2017
    12:03pm
    Spoken by a true narcissist - a super-privileged PRICK with no capacity for empathy or compassion and no clue what it is to really suffer. Cancer twice? CRAP! Anyone who had would not be the vile, nasty, cruel psychopath you are, OG.
    Old Geezer
    15th May 2017
    10:02am
    Rainey yes I have had cancer twice and I know all about the treatment and it's side effects. Anyone that dwells upon it is after nothing but attention. Poor little old me! I also know about chronic pain and how to treat it using your mind. After all I am classified as being chronically ill and way too many people suffer instead of doing what it takes to live a life free of pain. That's right the same way they whinge about being poor instead of doing something positive about it. I have no time at all for people who whinge.
    Misty
    15th May 2017
    1:05pm
    OG I am sure many people commenting here suffer from chronic pain, or know someone who does, so can you please let us know how you manage to live a pain free life?.
    Chrissy L
    10th May 2017
    9:06pm
    I have re-posted my comments from yesterday. I am really concerned watching Seniors on TV thinking this is a good thing. It is NOT for a lot of people. If you are a Part Pensioner - BEWARE
    See a trusted Financial Advisor before making a move.

    "I really don't think there was anything in this budget for pensioners/part pensioners/retirees. Maybe a little bit, if you want to downsize your home and value, but then your pension gets a hit or you may lose it completely, depending on how much money you have. You would need to factor that in. THIS GOVERNMENT JUST DOES NOT GET IT.
    They are being dragged kicking and screaming, adopting diluted policies of the Labor Government, along with putting the boot into the young people of our country by putting up Tertiary costs and reducing the time for them to pay it back to try and try to get some street cred to scrape back into Government. More attacks on the Welfare recipients. All whilst investors get a free ride on negative gearing and the top end of town continues to get richer. The Banks will pass on their increased costs to their customers to ensure their profits remain obscene. Debt has increased under this Government and future plans to surplus are all just "pie in the sky" forecasts. I think they are an insult to the intelligence of Seniors. Sorry Malcolm and Scomo...I don't believe in Santa Claus either! "

    I haven't missed the $75 one off payment to help with Power costs. It will reimburse me for Seven and a half weeks of what this government has ripped off me as a Part Pensioner in the recent Asset Test Changes. Sorry, I am not excited about it at all. This is another con job by this government to try and scrape back into Government at the next election. The bottom line is that Part Pensioners and Retirees have been used as an easy target by this Government to reduce our Income in Retirement. I hope they all get thrown out at the next election they could easily get a job selling dodgy cars, they have the experience in buckets loads.
    Old Geezer
    11th May 2017
    10:26am
    Power prices will just rise to take advantage of the extra $75 so you can't win.
    Anonymous
    13th May 2017
    2:16am
    Same as the cost of housing once people start putting money away and salary sacrificing to make a deposit....... the vultures will 'deem' that everyone must have that amount to put away, and the cost of a HOME for the majority will be that much farther away...

    Do you think we were all born yesterday?
    johnp
    11th May 2017
    11:00am
    I agree with ex PS where they say
    ""
    Tax at the rate of over 50% on money in a a Super Fund, has someone changed the Super Tax rules when I was asleep?
    ""
    I believe this is still right as its tax free in the hand within super environment
    5% of $300K is $15000 a year ??

    11th May 2017
    11:38am
    Cut poor old OG some slack. He must be really upset. Predicted a further cruel attack on all retirees in this budget, including changing assets test to include the family home. He was so sure of himself too! And delighting in the belief that battling retirees would suffer more hurt and ongoing hardship. Must be really tough for such a selfish, self-serving, nasty individual to discover he was completely wrong and some retirees actually got a benefit (albeit a rather insulting pittance!)
    Old Geezer
    11th May 2017
    11:50am
    Ha ha Rainey. If it's not this budget it will happen in the next or one after it. There is simply not enough revenue available to pay all those OAPs who simply don't need the money as they have other means of support. Anyone retiring today will see it before they depart this mortal world.

    What's more I've heard this morning that the banking levy is going to be extended to all banks and lending institutions and levied on all their liabilities over $250,000.
    Anonymous
    13th May 2017
    2:17am
    OG is very familiar to me from other fora (rforums) - he is a psychopath....
    Anonymous
    14th May 2017
    11:58am
    Yes, Trebor. He is that.

    11th May 2017
    11:45am
    So you (as a couple) have $530K in assets and an $800K house. You downsize to a $500K house and put $300K into super. Your income increases by maybe $15,000 (less management costs). Your risk of loss skyrockets because the stock market is far more volatile than real estate. And you lose your pension because you are now over the assets limit. And the gain is...?
    Anonymous
    11th May 2017
    11:50am
    Answer: In most cases this couple would lose $22800 in pension income so would be at least $7800 worse off, probably more...

    ANOTHER STUPID ILL-CONCEIVED POLICY CHANGE BY A DUMB GOVERNMENT THAT TAKES US ALL FOR BIGGER FOOLS THAN THE POLITICIANS MAKING THESE IDIOTIC DECISIONS.
    Old Geezer
    11th May 2017
    11:52am
    As I said before Rainey there is a better way available by gifting your kids the difference on settlement.
    ex PS
    11th May 2017
    2:13pm
    O.G my take on current legislation is that gifted money over a certain value will be deemed as earning 3.5%. Have the rules changed?
    Old Geezer
    11th May 2017
    2:34pm
    No if the money does not go into your account so Centrelink has no knowledge of it and no way of finding it.
    Anonymous
    13th May 2017
    2:19am
    OG lives in India where the rules are different...
    Anonymous
    14th May 2017
    11:44am
    OG, you are wrong on this one. Centrelink requires that you disclose the sale price and the purchase price. In fact, it can be hard to evidence the real costs of downsizing as there are huge costs involved in moving and all the many incidental costs and little things needed to make a new dwelling suit your needs.
    LiveItUp
    14th May 2017
    10:15pm
    Why would Centrelink want to even know Rainey because it is not an asset for the asset test? A solicitor friend of mine tells me that people do this a lot now.
    johnp
    11th May 2017
    1:55pm
    Being self funded (just); i am starting to think I would be better to spend about $500K and go on the full OAP. Then I will have better regular income as the $500K does not seem to generate as much income as is received by the full OAP !! Am I right in my thinking ?? Understand that it would need more detailed analysis but thats a basic assessment.
    ex PS
    11th May 2017
    2:19pm
    My research would back that up, but then you would be subject to the incompetent vagaries of this government, is it worth it in the long run?

    Better to live a good lifestyle while it lasts and then go on the retirement entitlement. Live big and then change to a more frugal life style, that seems to be what this incompetent government is aiming for.

    Aim for average seems to be this governments motto.
    Old Geezer
    11th May 2017
    2:45pm
    I say to people to enjoy your life ad only get welfare if it suits your circumstances. No good being the wealthiest person in the cemetery. So learn the rules and play the game.
    Misty
    11th May 2017
    4:28pm
    Was that you OG, advertising a tent for rent in the backyard for $130.00 and also asking the successful person they needed to help clean the house?, any way bad luck whoever it was as the council rules do not allow it. (Sorry to go off topic but I just couldn't resist it.)
    Old Geezer
    12th May 2017
    11:55am
    No Misty I already have enough spare rooms to let so the tent is for only those desperate enough when they miss out on a room. Then again why bother letting the rooms out as I don't need the income and certainly not the work cleaning them.

    Byron Bay has lots of tents to rent now if you want one. $130 a week wouldn't be enough to secure one though more like $130 a night.
    johnp
    11th May 2017
    3:51pm
    thanks to ex PS and OG for yr comments. I dont know how to click reply to comments so this will go to the end I suppose - I am not a very good technophile
    Still like answer from someone re
    I agree with ex PS where they say
    ""
    Tax at the rate of over 50% on money in a a Super Fund, has someone changed the Super Tax rules when I was asleep?
    ""
    I believe super its tax free in the hand within super environment
    5% of $300K is $15000 a year ??
    Anonymous
    13th May 2017
    2:21am
    You are repeating yourself - do the figures again for the difference between someone putting cash into an existing super fund and a pensioner putting it into an interest bearing deposit and losing pension.

    One gains well - the other loses.

    You would do well to stop harping on a single error and actually look at the issues and the figures.
    Justsane
    12th May 2017
    2:31pm
    What was really needed re housing, was to let pensioners downsize (which I do not recommend, by the way) and keep the difference between the two houses (or some of it) and still keep the amount of pension they were on. I don't know why they brought superannuation into it. Not every pensioner has super.
    Anonymous
    13th May 2017
    2:21am
    Exactly...


    Join YOURLifeChoices, it’s free

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