Calls for key changes to the Age Pension assets test

Font Size:

The family home could soon be considered under the Age Pension assets test, should recommendations by the Institute of Actuaries Australia be adopted.

In its pre-budget submission, the institute has called on the Government to consider imposing a dollar cap on the value of the family home that is exempt from the assets test. The cap could improve fairness in the system for homeowners and non-homeowners.

According to the submission, 95 per cent of homeowners would be on retirement incomes at least equivalent to the Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia modest level, compared to 28 per cent of renting couples.

Single female renters would have the lowest retirement incomes, with 23 per cent projected to reach ‘modest’ levels compared to 35 per cent of male renters.

“Actual rental payments are significantly higher than the level of Centrelink rental assistance, with the maximum Centrelink rent assistance being $136 per fortnight for a single renter living alone whereas the median rent is closer to $400 a fortnight,” states the submission.

The submission also damned Rent Assistance as inadequate, saying it had fallen as a percentage of average rental payments since 2001. The institute recommends Commonwealth rental assistance be increased by 40 per cent to provide adequate support for renting age pensioners and other welfare recipients.

Read the Institute of Actuaries full pre-Budget submission.

What would you say to a cap on the value of the family home? What dollar cap would you recommend? Or should the family home remain exempt from the means test?

Join YourLifeChoices today
and get this free eBook!

Join
By joining YourLifeChoices you consent that you have read and agree to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy

RELATED LINKS

Are Age Pension changes ruining your retirement?

Changes to the Age Pension rules are having a detrimental effect on retirees.

Retirees warned to prepare for new assets test

Retirees should prepare to avoid this year's new ‘tax grab': Noel Whittaker.

ACCI says family home should be included in assets test

The ACCI recommends that the family home be included in pension assets test.

Written by Leon Della Bosca

Leon Della Bosca is a voracious reader who loves words. You'll often find him spending time in galleries, writing, designing, painting, drawing, or photographing and documenting street art. He has a publishing and graphic design background and loves movies and music, but then, who doesn’t?

Contact:
LinkedIn
Email

363 Comments

Total Comments: 363
  1. 0
    0

    Family home should be exempt. If someone bought a home many years ago, and the value has increased substantially, it should not disadvantage them if they want to continue living there.

    • 0
      0

      Agree. Any government that goes down this path we see and feel the might of retires. Franking credits would seem a drop in the ocean compared to the protests and the wrath of home owners.

    • 0
      0

      The family home should be asset tested. Stop people becoming asset rich with multi million dollar homes & claiming welfare.
      Under the current system the asset difference between a homeowner & a non homeowner is $207k. A good starting point. If your home is valued at $300k then $93k will be added to your assets.
      Won’t be long when only a few will be paid the OAP. No one in Shitney or Melboring that owns any house will be on a pension. In fact most homeowners will not get a pension.
      Save this great nation billions every year, & will be able to afford those long overdue tax cuts for companies & multi nationals.
      Great idea

    • 0
      0

      What utter nonsense, Lothario… typical of your troll posts…

      Suggesting a reasonable ceiling would be apt.. let’s say two million and indexed.. that way only the Fat Bastards will be caught and wow, will we hear the whining…

    • 0
      0

      The “Lothario” above is an imposter . Using my name and posting pro labor propaganda
      No idea why someone would resort to such dirty tactics unless he’s a child or a labor troll

    • 0
      0

      Ah – two different ones….. different sign up dates…but what gave you away is that mention of ‘Labor propaganda’…. very amusing play but not hard to spot…

    • 0
      0

      Something is odd ,for a home owner residing in a $1 million plus, property not wanting to downsize, not wanting to cash in but expecting a welfare hand-out! Odd indeed!!

    • 0
      0

      Downsize to where? A hut on the Wilcannia to Kyakatoo dingo fence?

    • 0
      0

      Lothario, you are too funny, lol! That had to be tongue in cheek once you got to the last line.
      Lothario, it is you because a name cannot be repeated because up pops the statement that this name is already in use.
      I will take what you say in future with a grain of salt!

    • 0
      0

      Regional town! Retirement home!

    • 0
      0

      Lothario is a mean and nasty stooge for the LNP>

    • 0
      0

      Oh dear, Lothario having another one of his identity day’s confusion where he doesn’t know if he is Lothario1, Lothario2 or FLV.

    • 0
      0

      No point explaining anything to idiots . Wouldn’t be surprised if one of you is the impostor . Sad little troll

    • 0
      0

      The ONLY moron on this post is YOU Lothario!

      If a universal pension were reinstated rather than attempts to destitute retirees we would not need to have this conversation. The coast of the pension pales into insignificance when compared to the recent Turnbull tax cuts for the wealthy and I cannot see why older Australians have made their contributions to the country and now need to be under constant attack from a malicious, feral rich man’s government.

      Oh yes….rich folk don’t get a pension anyway and do not care. What they want is TAX CUTS and lots of them. We all know they want the same tax rate as the offshore tax shelters we all, apparently, have to compete with: ZERO PERCENT!

    • 0
      0

      Talking about yourself again Lothario

    • 0
      0

      One of the Lotharios shows as having joined 21.4.2018 and has no image. The other one shows as having joined on 4.11.2018 and includes the standard Lothario image. I respectfully suggest that that indicates that Paddington is incorrect about there cannot be two with the same name.

    • 0
      0

      Thank you Sceptic. Some a/hole changed his/her name to mine and posting contrarion views to mine
      I suggest they are probably labor trolls or a child

    • 0
      0

      Arvo, if someone has to move from their highly priced home to a regional town there are a lot of step to go through first. Looking for a new house is not done in five minutes so there is the expense of travelling to that regional town half a dozen or more times. Often there are things to do to bring the house up to standard, more expense. Solicitor’s fees, removalist’s fees, estate agent’s fees, transfer of utilities fees, stamp duty, redirecting your mail fees, moving into a smaller house probably means furniture is too big so new items have to be purchased. If you have pets they’ll probably be in kennels for the move.
      However moving will take the person from an area where s/he will have some support from family and/or friends which means that the same kind of support will need to come from government agencies so less money paid out by government for pension but more to be paid out for home aid. No win for government and a huge loss for pensioner.
      Think before you make anymore glib comments.

    • 0
      0

      Paddington, this website DOES allow registration of the same user name. It’s a bad technical flaw. Someone claimed my name some months ago and posted offensive rubbish pretending to be me. When I changed my name, he changed his to the name I had changed to. At that point, YLC management finally believed my complaint of mischief-making and took action.

      Lothario, you should report this creep. This behaviour is appalling. It should not be tolerated.

    • 0
      0

      Paddington, this website DOES allow registration of the same user name. It’s a bad technical flaw. Someone claimed my name some months ago and posted offensive rubbish pretending to be me. When I changed my name, he changed his to the name I had changed to. At that point, YLC management finally believed my complaint of mischief-making and took action.

      Lothario, you should report this creep. This behaviour is appalling. It should not be tolerated.

    • 0
      0

      Mick, I agree with you 100%.

    • 0
      0

      Triss- ah…so that explains why they deserve a welfare hand out. Thanks for justifying the apathy and avolition of bludgers!!!

    • 0
      0

      Find out “which” party is going to do this before you vote is my suggestion!!

    • 0
      0

      Arvo Triss made points that don’t count but…

      Once depreciation and inflation and costs of purchasing and interest are subtracted from property prices it leaves a fairly small capital gain for any who have held the one home over decades.

      There is no getting around the mathematics.

      Regardless of the belief that people have grown “wealthy” by owning a house it’s not absolutely true.

      What is a problem is the tendency to upgrade house after house that produces no income. It has been a waste of resources for many. If they are dependent on the OAP sitting in an expensive home in an expensive area then the rising costs of holding the home will be the problem for many and eventually a sale must occur.

      This policy has been encouraged by both political parties to suit the need for stamp duty and support for banks, legal and real estate industries. Avoiding tax is not necessarily the smartest investment decision.

      I can’t see the home being added to the asset test regardless of Grattan or the actuaries.

      They should know better than to even bring the issue up.

  2. 0
    0

    No asset test in any form, everyone receives full pension. Rental assistance given to all, renters and home owners no segregation all equal.
    Every One Fills Out Tax Return Showing All Income. That includes Offshore Payments and Pension Funds/Annuities, Pay Tax accordingly.
    Politicians To have access to Their Pension not before 60 at the earliest and RETIRED FROM WORK,DIRECTORSHIPS ETC.

    • 0
      0

      Money offshored and onshored for trading purposes deemed is charged 30% transfer tax – take it up with the judge…

    • 0
      0

      Who’s running a business.
      Earnings and payments made to an individual.
      No Cayman Island BS.

    • 0
      0

      Ignore Thebore
      I have money invested in super overseas like many others
      So Thebore will have me pay 30% to transfer money into my investment and 30 % when I withdraw it to live in retirement
      Idiot

    • 0
      0

      .. you’ll love it when it is taxed when storming the beaches, Lothario… can’t wait to see the look on your face.. super held outside Australia doesn’t fall under the same rules.. that’ll be the rule….

      **rubs hands together in glee**

      You, sir, are a mine of information for legislators and tax people….. of course you got it backwards – YOU would be paying 30% to move it Offshore and then 30% to move it Onshore again… but of course you would try to cloud the waters of what I suggested.. no other option…

      Not many ‘ignore’ my learned comments, Loathie – you, on the other hand ….. publicly confessing to every tax cheat under the sun is hardly likely to endear you to anyone…

    • 0
      0

      Bro Shorten and the Party will command that the ATO go over ‘family companies’, ‘trusts’ and such with a fine toothed comb…. they’ve said so…..

      No wonder you’re so desperately obfuscating and got more moves than Mohamed Ali on steroids…

    • 0
      0

      And everyone pays back any pension received when they die.

    • 0
      0

      My funds held outside Australia are tax exempt . It complies with ATO definition for tax exempt investments that are conseodrerd equivalent .
      Don’t talk about stuff you don’t understand Thebore

    • 0
      0

      Good luck with that idea OG, and how do you think that idea would go down in the electorate??, people who only have the pension to live on and very little assets would have nothing left to pay back. Who would pay it back?, I cannot see any relies embracing this idea, what a ridiculous thought bubble.

    • 0
      0

      Misty most people would like the idea as if you can afford to pay it back then why not.

    • 0
      0

      Misty most people would like the idea as if you can afford to pay it back then why not.

    • 0
      0

      Why, OG? It’s a bought and paid for right…. once you get it, it’s yours, not the state’s, just like all your other bought and paid for property.

    • 0
      0

      Rules were made to be changed, Lothario – for exactly the reason of catching cheats like you.

    • 0
      0

      OG if you can afford to pay it back you shouldn’t be receiving it in the first place.

    • 0
      0

      If you own a house then you can afford to pay it back.

    • 0
      0

      Trebor not it’s welfare and can be taken from you at any time.

    • 0
      0

      And, OG, everyone who has had free medical bills can also pay them back on their death

    • 0
      0

      NO, OG. We paid enough tax. After slogging a lifetime to own a home, often with a strong desire to leave something for children, nobody should have it taken from them on death. That’s disgusting. People will stop investing in homes and just claim rent assistance if the government keeps on punishing every act that is responsible and good for the economy.

    • 0
      0

      NO, OG. We paid enough tax. After slogging a lifetime to own a home, often with a strong desire to leave something for children, nobody should have it taken from them on death. That’s disgusting. People will stop investing in homes and just claim rent assistance if the government keeps on punishing every act that is responsible and good for the economy.

    • 0
      0

      Not going to bother with your last abuse of reality, OG – you are still wrong.

    • 0
      0

      YLC seems to deliberately bring out this moronic idea every now and then – probably just to invite the usual mindless responses by interest groups (tribes, as they call it) to attack each other – instead of trying to unite the Retirees group. Bit sad, they need to try harder to work for us, ALL of us, being a website for older people.

      Chris B T, you are right, it should be Universal Age Pension – based only on Age (65 yrs) and Residency (say 15 years) with NO other tests. Politicians, past & present should have all their Special Pensions scrapped, and also become eligible under the same rules as anyone else (from Age 65, not 60).

      No way should the family home, which people worked and saved for through their lifetime, be included in any Assets Test. The Institute of Actuaries are a bunch of dodos with tunnel vision – they should have instead recommended the Universal Age Pension idea as above, and scrapping of Politician Special Pensions – clearly no guts, and no ability to think outside the box.

    • 0
      0

      Homes increase in value over the years. The pension is money provided to people who do not have any other income by the time they retire. Their primary home should NEVER be counted in the asset test. They worked hard, they paid taxes, n they saved to buy a house x their retirement. If u dont have a house by the time u retired, there’s something wring w you, dont blame those who have one. Also, u will get rental assistance, home owners dont.

    • 0
      0

      But Blinky, why doesn’t the same hold true for people who saved for retirement. Some downsized their homes to be self-supporting. They also worked hard and paid taxes, yet it seems most here think they are a fair target for abuse and deprivation.

  3. 0
    0

    This is a nightmare scenario for most pensioners who own their own homes. We have enough to worry about with increased food costs, paying bills and health insurance, etc.

    • 0
      0

      It won’t happen any time soon. Political suicide for any party who introduced it. Not just old people but their children and grandchildren would also be up in arms

    • 0
      0

      Miranda: This is a pre-budget idea/submission from the Institute of Actuaries to the government to consider. With an election around the corner nothing will happen it would be political suicide for the Coalition. These so-called advisers to government make submissions without giving the different type of age pensioners a proper thought or even contacting any of them. They are probably in the category of wealthy people on incomes much larger than we ever earned and with tidy sums in superannuation so its easy for them to suggest the home be included.

    • 0
      0

      Remember, Miranda, there are a whole heap of people who are coming to retirement age who have struggled to pay off their house. If they think that government is going to take it off them when they can no longer work that government is for the compost bin.
      Besides which, if people have to sell their house to live because they are refused a pension they will then have to rent so government will be forking out for rent assistance so they won’t be saving much.
      Mind you, that might be the one thing that makes the apathetic stand on their hind legs and hiss.

  4. 0
    0

    Yes Shorten and Bowen place a cap on the family home value or include the whole thing in the assets test
    Its the next logical step in his policy progression

  5. 0
    0

    Leave our homes alone. why are those who can least afford it always being punished? Artificial activities push the prices of homes out of the reach of many. what is the formulae going to be? Market value, which is often inflated – where is the incentive to keep your home looking good if that is going to penalise the home owner?

  6. 0
    0

    For thousands of older women, their ‘family home’ has been their only source of security, and where they put their retirement savings when they weren’t eligible for superannuation.

    How glibly these economists talk about superannuation and pensions as if the lived history of millions of us never happened.

    Or do they just not care about the women shut out of superannuation, shut out of education and professions, shut out of well paid jobs reserved for men? Are they so privileged and middle class, they cannot imagine what life is and has been like for for so many older Australians.

    If this should go ahead because they can show long term advantage for the whole community, not just a cash grab from defenceless pensioners, then the homes of full pensioners who survived the ‘ancien regime’ with at least a home to show for it, should be grandfathered.

    If I had any franked shares, they are welcome to them, but my home? Forget it. Years of going without to get and keep a roof over my head do not deserve this. Paying council rates is a constant challenge on a mingey pension. Losing the pension because I have an old house where gentrification has made it valuable to developers would be a travesty.

    • 0
      0

      Travellersajoy – we appear to be in the same boat. I absolutely, totally, completely and utterly agree with you! I am sick and tired of being penalised because I worked hard, stayed off government handouts, and supported myself. Now that I am on my RIGHTFULLY ENTITLED Aged Pension, now they want to penalise me!
      I’m with you – HANDS OFF MY HOME! Spend your time targeting big business’s who don’t pay their rightful taxes (and send their money off shore). And politicians with their fingers continually in the tax payers trough. I can guarantee there are plenty of other Bronwyn Bishops and Mathias Cormann – they just haven’t been caught out yet. They are ONLY sorry when they get caught out.

    • 0
      0

      If one is living in a residential home worth $1 million THEY ARE WEALTHY, they can sell, cash in, downsize. So why is that person expecting a welfare handout?
      What if the government said this,
      “OK-you want to remain in your home worth $1 million and claim pension, we will let you and we will pay you a pension, however, we will place a caveat over your home so when you pass away we will get back our tax payer’s welfare money paid to you plus interest’ out of your deceased estate.
      Is this fair?

    • 0
      0

      Arvo, $1 million home in Sydney or Melbourne is nothing flash. People who worked and saved to pay off a mortgage should never be forced to sell and move to unfamiliar surroundings. That would be elder abuse

    • 0
      0

      Spot on Sundays. The magic figures this government has come up with is intended to CATCH OUT anybody who had worked, saved and planned for their SELF FUNDED retirement. That may not be fair but it is the quintessential ‘envy’ at work. Better we spend all, go on the pension and then watch the pension fall for all as the weight of more and more pensioners crushes it. Then posters like Arvo will have their next brain snap.
      What is missed in all of this is that MOST self funded retirees got to where they are by doind some pretty hard yards which most others refused to consider because they wanted life style. Now the same lot want to discriminate against those who saved for a better life in retirement rather than their working lives. Painful!

    • 0
      0

      Ah but Mick – its your labor party and its socialist ideals at work. Bring everyone down to the lowest common denominator. Except the labor ruling class of course

    • 0
      0

      Arvo, don’t you think that the ex politicians should also downsize before they get a taxpayer funded pension? Or aren’t you brave enough to suggest that?

    • 0
      0

      Like many around these days, Lothario, you deliberately confuse leftie and rightie for some kind of attempt at total dominance of society by either in isolation – the reality is that there are a set of people outside the normal people who strive for that, and they cross all party and political boundaries…

      The feminist striving for hegemony, using the thin excuse that ‘the patriarchy’ abuses and controls everyone, is but one… patriarchy is a poor choice of word – deliberately, of course – since 50% of ‘the patriarchy’ beneficiaries are women already…. so it should properly be patrimatriarchy or some Brave New Word……

    • 0
      0

      Triss- don’t taunt people about being not being brave, especially the ones you don’t know anything about.

    • 0
      0

      Sundays- No problem. No one should be forced out of their own home and no one should be expecting the government to pay them a welfare pension where pensioners have wealthy assets they can dispose off and live off them. Yeah, that’s fair!

    • 0
      0

      Actually, no Arvo. The old age pension is a right which has been paid for by taxpayers past, present and future. Do your own research and it was promised to the current group of pensioners by Government to assist them in their old age before super was even thought of. It is Not Welfare. If you want more, you save more. No one, who saves and pays off a mortgage should be expected to sell their home to fund their retirement. That would stop any incentive to save and destroy the economy.

    • 0
      0

      And Arvo, if you actually own your own home, you would understand the sacrifices people have made. Firstly, you couldn’t even get a loan without saving at least 20% deposit, then the lending rules were much tighter than today, and in the 1980s interest rates rose to 17%. You don’t reach retirement to be then told that you have to sell up and use it for retirement. Why would anyone bother, just spend up.

    • 0
      0

      Oh, so the lucky guy who could afford a cottage in a working class suburb in a city and sit and watch the value soar should get a pension, but the battler who struggled to pay off a shack in the country or downsized to a unit and invested to try to be self-funded should be robbed. Yep, that’s about what I’d expect from you, Sundays. Gross unfairness and socialist BS.

      I battled to buy a home AND I battled to save. Why should owners of expensive homes be favoured over owners of modest homes who chose to invest more responsibly and more beneficially for the nation?

    • 0
      0

      Oh, so the lucky guy who could afford a cottage in a working class suburb in a city and sit and watch the value soar should get a pension, but the battler who struggled to pay off a shack in the country or downsized to a unit and invested to try to be self-funded should be robbed. Yep, that’s about what I’d expect from you, Sundays. Gross unfairness and socialist BS.

      I battled to buy a home AND I battled to save. Why should owners of expensive homes be favoured over owners of modest homes who chose to invest more responsibly and more beneficially for the nation?

    • 0
      0

      Actually, you are the Socialist because you want us all on the same level playing field. Not possible and failed in every communist country. Instead of whining about your Franking credits, and comparing yourself to others get busy at looking for alternative investments. The clock is ticking!

    • 0
      0

      You bought shares as an investment and someone else bought a house as a home. The house has increased in value compared to the shares. Now, you are crying foul? You didn’t do it to benefit the nation, that’s nonsense.

    • 0
      0

      yes she did you numbnut. She did it so she can be financially independent and not rely on the pension. Same thing

      Why does an OAP with a $5M dollar house get welfare when someone on a $200K HOUSE WITH $500K ASSETS INVESTED TO FUND THEIR RETIREMENT GET NOTHING ???

    • 0
      0

      yes she did you numbnut. She did it so she can be financially independent and not rely on the pension. Same thing

      Why does an OAP with a $5M dollar house get welfare when someone on a $200K HOUSE WITH $500K ASSETS INVESTED TO FUND THEIR RETIREMENT GET NOTHING ???

    • 0
      0

      Posting once is enough Lothario, you don’t have to do it twice, another thing you and OGR do, post twice, anyway where didf you get those figures from Lothario, how do you know how much OGR’S house and assets are?.

    • 0
      0

      Actually, Lothario $500k for both a single and couple would still qualify for a part pension. Up to $844k for a home owning couple and you qualify. Once you sort out your multiple personalities, you might want to work on your facts.

    • 0
      0

      And you might want to learn to read as well as acquiring some manners, Sundays. He referred to AN OAP and SOMEONE – not a couple.

      And Misty, perhaps you could stop being rude and insulting and start learning a little about technology. I click once and two posts appear. I delete the duplicate when I can get back to it fast enough, but neither I nor Lothario are responsible for the malfunctioning of YLC website. And Lothario DID NOT say anything about those figures relating to me. He was generalising. Really disgraceful how you two continue to attack and insult anyone you don’t agree with, but are the first to cry if you feel offended at a response.

    • 0
      0

      I am not being insulting OGR , justtrying to point out what many others have posted on YLC’S Topics where people were having this problem, you just press post once after your comment and straight away click on the F5 key and only one post will show up. It is a shame you are imagining that I am attacking you OGR as you are the one who continually attacks and insults me, I have never called anyone scum in my life, not like you have.

  7. 0
    0

    How rediculous and insulting to we hard working Australians who placed every cent, during their working lives, into paying off our family homes, so that we would be secure in our retirement. The family home should NEVER be considered to be included in the asset test. I for one worked very hard, and did without holidays, dining out, clothing, a motor vehicle, and any form of entertainment during my working life, so that I could pay of my family home by the time I retired. In the meantime, I saw those who were not working, and/or made poor life choices, and relied on welfare, wearing nice clothes, driving a motor vehicle and residing in a nice affordable housing accomodation at a discounted price. To include the family home in the asset test would be seen as a punishment to those of us who worked hard, and made hard choices, to secure our family home.

    • 0
      0

      This reasoning should be extended to every non-income bearing asset purchased out of after-tax income – by what standard should a person be forced to pay twice for their taxation?

      If I own a 50′ yacht (I did but the idiot at the marina rammed it and sank it without saying anything), all bought and paid for out of after tax earnings – that is mine – it does not belong to any ‘government’ to do with as it chooses. Same with a Windbag or anything else that actually costs to run, and does not recoup income.

      You’ve paid tax once – purchased out of your net income – it is YOURS – not Uncle Guv’s – and has no bearing on your pension rights.

    • 0
      0

      You are 100% on the money CoogeeGuy. Sadly the have nots often feel they are owed rather than understanding they made different life choices and spent their money in their working lifetime. Others, like us, forwent that and now want a leisurely retirement. Sadly the have nots want it all.

    • 0
      0

      Oh, I dunno, Mick – some had to suffer through divorce and asset stripping, illness, injury, and a host of piss poor government policy thrusts, all of which effectively remove personal sovereignty from the individual and repose sovereignty in either government or a pack of mongrels titled ‘bosses’… who through their personal unions, are in league with government.

      All these dreadful social ills are the direct result of governments’ equalising’ everyone by making Brave New Rules for everything – as long as it suited some and not all. Every such policy starting from the 1970’s has been fatally flawed and ultimately fatal to this nation and its people.

      Just look at the social and economic mess around you…. and remember not to point fingers too much…… wear their shoes for a while and see…

      BOTR.

    • 0
      0

      After the Abbott debacle on moving the goal posts on on Pensioners , I could not envisage a Government creating havoc for the aged again . Forcing people out of their homes at an age where the emotional and physical involvement could easily mean death to some of them , can only be seen as the ultimate in cruelty . It would also punish the person who made sacrifices in life to pay for owning his home . Quite the contrary the way it should be seen but Labor may see it as another way to pay for future Boat people . Just get the Centrelink statistics on the last lot Labor blessed us with and you will see why our Pensions and homes are not safe .

    • 0
      0

      Labor IS creating havoc for the aged again, Oldman Roo – substantially the SAME aged who were kicked in the guts by the LNP a while back. Seems the aged are an easy target. Don’t be too sure of anything. The one advantage both parties know they have is that envy and spite ensure such division that there can never be united opposition to anything they do.

  8. 0
    0

    As long as the subject keeps getting an airing, it is doubtful that any government would be stupid enough to try it…

    Il faut fair un demonstration… show ’em your bayonets flashing in the sun and they know to avoid you.

    • 0
      0

      WRONG TREBOR.

      The current government started ‘Workchoices’. It WILL bring the family home into the assets test the same as it WILL build new coal fired power stations. This lot have no soul and its not if but rather when. Bank on that.

    • 0
      0

      Labor isn’t backing off a nasty and unfair proposal that is getting tons of adverse publicity, so don’t count on any government being smart. STUPID and power mad seems to be the order of the day.

    • 0
      0

      I’m saying we are at least making our thoughts and feeling known before they try it – so they have no excuses after.

      Just yesterday (I Saw Someone New) a business group said that the current workplace rules were the cause of low wages growth and not piss poor management at all levels, along with the culture of greed as shown so clearly by several here – in other words – if they were permitted open slather and no rules, everyone would profit mightily – I had to laugh…..

    • 0
      0

      Give it a rest OGR I think everyone including me is just fed up with your me me me every post

    • 0
      0

      Is it Misty, Paddington or Sundays impersonating Lothario, I wonder?

    • 0
      0

      Not me but he is clever!

    • 0
      0

      How can YLC allow this a/hole to impersonate me and throw insults at other posters
      YLC please remove this idiot

    • 0
      0

      I thought it was you, OGR, as your posts are very similair.

    • 0
      0

      My comments are nothing at all like those of the fake Lothario, Misty. I post reasoned FACT, not propaganda and bigoted rubbish. Maybe you could try to do the same instead of allying with Sundays to make continual personal attacks?

    • 0
      0

      My comments are nothing at all like those of the fake Lothario, Misty. I post reasoned FACT, not propaganda and bigoted rubbish. Maybe you could try to do the same instead of allying with Sundays to make continual personal attacks?

    • 0
      0

      Your imagination working overtime again OGR, you are the one making personal attacks on me and pensioners. Do you think people won’t take offense when you continually abuse and insult them?, of course they won’t put up with it OGR.

  9. 0
    0

    ABSOLUTELY NO!! I am single, have worked and fought bloody hard to pay off my own home, forgoing holidays, going out, even settling down with a partner. Now on OAP. But my little house is MINE. Yet my blood sucking sister who has never worked a day in her life, 2 kids to different fathers, still renting a 3 BR govt house, on the DSP due to lung problems (caused by self inflicted chronic smoking) – goes on a cruise each year, doesn’t have to worry about house maintenance, plus my parents always supported her (even gave her a new car) – because she was ‘struggling’. ‘Struggling’ – my foot! She just knew how to play the system!
    But it appears SHE was the smart one. So if my house is included in the assets test – and I need some money. What do I do – sell a bedroom? Sell off the garage? I bought my house when it was so run down, it was all I could afford, and no one else wanted it! I have worked my backside off to do it up, make it livable, and hopefully stay in till I kick the bucket. So now I am to be punished because I have worked hard, put my blood, sweat and tears (many!) in to it, making it a HOME?

    NO! And how would this be worked out? A home worth $500,000 in Sydney would be a dump. In many country towns, it would be a palace. And I suppose that would mean a whole new Govt Dept to manage it? Who and how would home values be assessed? I could not even begin to see how this could be done fairly and equitably.
    My elderly aunt first bought her home in the lat 1960’s, when it was the only one in an area, and people laughed at her saying she was mad. No other houses for miles. Now it would be the oldest house in the area – still in its original state. But it is her HOME (her husband has passed on). She has no children. She wants to stay in the home till she dies. Yes her house is now worth considerably more, but so what? Why should she be penalised? She struggles enough now on the OAP – it is totally wrong that her home should be included in the assets test.

    • 0
      0

      I am totally with you on this one sunnyOz. I am sure the Government would not even dare contemplate including our family homes in any asset test. Except for being placed into an Aged Care Centre of course. But that is a whole new story.

    • 0
      0

      Even with the downturn in house prices you will not find even a ‘dump’ in Sydney for $500,000 sunnyOz! Those days are long gone.

    • 0
      0

      I agree sunnyOz, it is stories like yours is the reason that the family home should not be included in the asset test, are they going to do that to politicians too?

  10. 0
    0

    Instead tax all companies 30% of gross estimated p.a., let them sort it out with the tax man… that’ll solve the money problems, and just like RobberDebt, many will not bother to argue and it will take years to get their case through… in the meantime the Guv has free use of their lovely… plenty of large going around out there that could be captured for consolidated revenue and pay the debts now due, such as pensions and involuntary unemployment ….

    Fix it – easy – give everyone a job….. a real job… and only tax pensioners on income above pension. Buoyant economy – or as Keating liked to utter it darkly – ‘an over-heated economy’ (meaning the salt of the earth = sum of the earth in politician eyes – are getting too much) …

Load More Comments

FACEBOOK COMMENTS



SPONSORED LINKS

continue reading

Finance

Five smart moves for empty nesters

So, the kids have moved out, your home is finally yours again and you have ascended to the rank of...

Lifestyle

Why you turn down the radio when you're trying to park your car?

When you're looking for a destination, you might need to cut down the volume. Shutterstock Simon Lilburn, University of Melbourne...

Technology

Why we can expect smarter healthcare in 2021 and other tech trends

With last year dominated by the COVID-19 pandemic and much the same expected for 2021, it is unsurprising that healthcare...

Mental Health

Drug trial offers rare hope on Alzheimer's disease

There is finally a glimmer of hope in the fight against Alzheimer's, the most common form of dementia, which affects...

Pets

How the pandemic has turbocharged the pet care industry

Pet care is a big business, and the pandemic has made it bigger. An Animal Medicines Australia report says Australians...

Travel News

Australian government divided on lifting overseas travel ban

The federal government is divided about when international air travel will recommence for Australians, as consumers signal their intent to...

Food

Dietitian reveals the breakfast swaps worth making

If you're looking to live a healthier lifestyle, breakfast is a good place to start. It's the first meal of...

Finance News

COVID driving more older Australians into poverty

Many of us who endured lockdowns in Australia are familiar with the surge in energy bills at home. But for...

LOADING MORE ARTICLE...