Geez Louise, here we go again ...

The myth that the Age Pension is unaffordable and unsustainable is simply not true.

When it comes to so-called ‘retirement affordability’ the truth of the matter is that we can afford a pension for all.

The subject of retirement affordability is both contentious and confusing. But what is crystal clear is that vested interests continue to propagate the falsehood that the Age Pension is unaffordable. It is not. There are many ways to balance the nation’s books and cutting welfare for those who are most vulnerable is both lazy and unfair.

Recent research released by the Australian Institute of Superannuation Trustees (AIST) that reveals that retirees are heading into retirement with increasing debt should come as no surprise. As YourLifeChoices members are aware, this trend has been occurring for years, and we have noted it time and again in our commentary.

What is worth noting is that yes, the housing affordability crisis is affecting all age groups, so trying to create an intergenerational war between ‘greedy’ baby boomers and poor younger people is neither accurate nor likely to lead to solutions to the real problems behind overheated property markets.

But lurking beneath this debate is an assumption that most commentators rarely challenge, instead choosing to parrot the current government’s preferred narrative, that the Age Pension is unaffordable, unsustainable, and contributes to a debt blowout that will hang like a millstone around the necks of future generations until the end of time (as witness Mr Shepherd’s current comments).

This is simply not true, and should be challenged until we get rid of this falsehood, once and for all.

How do we know this? Let’s go back the Intergenerational Report, an initiative of the Howard government to project future spending and how budgets might be balanced as the population ages. The first of these five-yearly reports was published in 2002 and it charted the percentage of the GDP spent on Age Pensions. In 2002 the Age Pension spending was projected to be five per cent of GDP for 2041/2.

Since then we have had three more reports (2007, 2010, 2015) and in the most recent one in 2015, the percentage of GDP currently spent on the Age Pension was 2.9 percent, and the projection 40 years forward to 2055 was 3.6 per cent. Since then, changes to pension eligibility will have reduced this projected percentage even further.

Yes, you do not need to be a mathematician to see that this percentage will barely change over the next 40 years.

So if there is a debt and deficit crisis (and no one is arguing that our national debt is increasing at an alarming rate), we need to look at other aspects of the national accounts to work out what is going wrong. Why is it always the welfare section which cops the cuts? Why do we create a multi-million dollar Robo debt recovery system to bully older Australians, many of whom actually owe Centrelink nothing? Yet we continue to lack the political will to target large companies who offshore their profits, paying little to no tax in Australia. Access to the Age Pension was tightened in January – a rule change that many pre-retirees were unable to respond to, as there was so little warning. Again, the change of rules on superannuation on 1 July will hit those struggling to manage their transition to retirement options. Why would any pre-retiree have faith in Australia’s retirement income system when the goal posts are moved so frequently?

Worst of all, these changes are based on the indefensible falsehood that Australia cannot afford the Age Pension – despite the fact we are the third meanest country in the world when it comes to Age Pension spending as a percentage of our GDP.

Research conducted by the Australia Institute shows that Australia could easily offer a universal Age Pension – for every citizen over age 65 – by trimming other spending on entitlement for those on higher incomes receiving a plethora of ‘free kicks’.

Yes, footy season is with us again, so let’s kick it off by asking the policy ‘umpires’ to apply the rules more fairly.

What do you think? Is Mr Shepherd right that Australia is being ‘crippled’ by pension spending? Should access to the Age Pension be further reduced?

RELATED ARTICLES





    COMMENTS

    To make a comment, please register or login
    feefifofum
    27th Mar 2017
    10:47am
    Tony Shepherd is a Tony Abbott stooge! How many mouthpieces does this ex PM have?

    Stopped following GWS once we realised that Tony Shepherd was Chairman of the footy club. Talk about self-interest!!!!!
    Mindy
    27th Mar 2017
    11:15am
    What self interest is there for Tony in this? Your rant demonstrates that you are selfish and only thinking about how you can continue to rip off the working people because you were too lazy to plan for your retirement!!
    Slimmer Cat
    27th Mar 2017
    11:53am
    I see that the author of this article has called the OAP for what it is -WELFARE.
    "Why is it always the welfare section which cops the cuts?"
    feefifofum
    27th Mar 2017
    12:22pm
    WOW Mindy - attacking much?

    I actually have planned well for my retirement - I retired 5-years before my preservation age and am enjoying a very comfortable lifestyle thank you very much for asking.

    I actually planned so well for my retirement that I do not claim the OAP, I am a self-funded retiree!!!!! Also, paying tax on my investments - yes, all of them! So, hmmmm, not sure where you get the idea that my post was an indication of my own self-interest?

    You ask how Tony Shepherd / Tony Abbott are self-interested? Well perhaps look at how the MP's keep voting to have their pensions / salaries / travel rorts etc. regularly increased above the rate of inflation, but they think its fair to cut pensions / benefit payments etc. and support many different methods of decreasing bug business tax to zero - that's an example of self-interest!

    Why do the LNP and its supporters think that it's pensioners ripping the Government / Society off? Perhaps big business could carry some of the tax burden that the rest of us do.
    Adrianus
    27th Mar 2017
    1:34pm
    Slimmer Cat.
    That is a very interesting observation.
    Oldman Roo
    27th Mar 2017
    9:42pm
    Mindy , It was Tony Abbott who introduced the Pension reforms leading to many part Pensioners having a lower income than the people who never planned for a future without Pension . Shifting the goal posts for elderly who planned and had financial advice before their retirement is cruel and reckless , not to forget Politicians are of course as always exempt .
    To my thinking you are the selfish one as you are obviously financially well off and do not care one bit about the less fortunate in the community . But I have to give you credit for having all that is required to make it to the top in the Liberal Party .
    Adrianus
    27th Mar 2017
    10:43pm
    Oldman Roo. Your greed and selfishness is exemplary. I'm sure if you were a member of the unions or Labor Party they would put your name forward for an award of some kind.
    It matters not that those who are doing it tough, and in real need, get a little extra. But in your opinion they don't deserve it. There are many opinions like yours in these forums and I do feel as though I should not expose myself to too much of this dark side of humanity. Life is too short as it is and I would like to think better of my fellow humans, regardless of their circumstances.
    Oldman Roo
    28th Mar 2017
    8:33am
    Frank , Your biased opinion is well known on this forum and if you were a man of substance , I could prove you wrong on all your assertions about me or my character , which clearly lack common sense from your side .
    But that is what the new breed of LNP is all about : Greed , Ignorance , lack of vision and adding insult to injury .
    Adrianus
    28th Mar 2017
    8:52am
    Mindy, these people DID plan. They planned to maximise their welfare payments. Their compassion does not extend beyond their noses. They are driven by greed and envy to support a mob of crooks. Organised slime.
    Oldman Roo
    28th Mar 2017
    10:28am
    You are wrong again and your arguments not worth entering into intelligent discussion .
    You may also be driven by jealousy .
    Anonymous
    31st Mar 2017
    4:56pm
    What a nasty and baseless assumption, Frank. Like all ASS-UMPTIONS, it makes you a prize ASS. You couldn't be more wrong. Many of those who were hurt by the assets test change worked very hard and were very frugal and are now deprived of any benefit for that work and saving, but are worse off than if they hadn't. They are now in the absurd position of having a strong incentive to spend up big on a cruise or such like or a bigger house because the taxpayer will hand them 150%+ of what they spend. How utterly STUPID!
    Adrianus
    1st Apr 2017
    12:56pm
    Rainey, your post makes no sense.

    "Many of those who were hurt by the assets test change worked very hard and were very frugal and are now deprived of any benefit for that work and saving, but are worse off than if they hadn't."

    How can they be worse off?
    Personally, I think the welfare is going to the people who need it the most, for a change.
    Far too many abusing the system if you ask me.
    Hobbit
    27th Mar 2017
    10:48am
    Churches & related entities have a tax free income of $30 Billion per year, if they only paid 10% tax it would go along way to balancing the budget. Of course if Multi Nationals paid their fair share of taxes we'd have no further problems, apart from greedy politicians claiming entitlements nobody else gets.
    Adrianus
    27th Mar 2017
    11:03am
    Hobbit would you include Islamic Mosques or just Christian, Hindu etc.?
    Eddy
    27th Mar 2017
    11:23am
    Frank, I don't know where your comment came from but it seems to indicate some degree of prejudice.
    I would go further than Hobbit and have any religious institution (including Christian, Islam, Hebrew, Hindu, scientology et al) which engages in business (ie renting property, investments, hospitals, nursing homes, retirement villages etc) should be taxed as any other business.
    In our modern secular country the idea that religions should be exempt from paying tax on their business income (not their income provided by private offerings or donations) is untenable.
    Adrianus
    27th Mar 2017
    11:30am
    Eddy, do you have something against religions? :)
    feefifofum
    27th Mar 2017
    12:23pm
    Absolutely agree Hobbit. Well said!

    And great additional comments Eddy - all religious entities should be sharing their wealth!
    Eddy
    27th Mar 2017
    4:39pm
    Yes Frank, being a non-believer, I consider all religions are based on a false premise that somewhere there is a supernatural being overseeing everything. I do not claim that Jesus, Mohammad or Bhudda were not real human beings any more than I can deny the existence of Joseph Smith, Jimmy Swaggert, Billy Graham, L. Ron Hubbard or others of their ilk.
    If any person chooses to believe in any god I acknowledge their right to do so. I do not see why the money-making businesses of religions should be exempt from tax. As it says in the bible, 'give unto Caesar what is Caesars'.
    Adrianus
    27th Mar 2017
    4:58pm
    OK, fair enough. My point is ....if we have a religion which is taxing us, how do you propose to turn the tables by taxing them?
    Eddy
    28th Mar 2017
    12:53pm
    Sorry Frank for the delay in responding.
    I am not aware of any religion which taxes us, can you give us an example. I am aware that some religions expect their members to pay a 'voluntary' tithe but I am confident I pay no tax to any religion (apart from things like government grants to religious schools or government donations to religious appeals in the case of disasters, which I personally have no objection to). If religions were liable for tax on their business operations I would leave it to the ATO to determine any tax liability, the same as for any other business or individual.
    Adrianus
    28th Mar 2017
    1:59pm
    That's ok Eddy. I understand. You had to check with the ABC first.
    maxchugg
    31st Mar 2017
    9:53am
    Eddy, I am aware of a religion that taxes us. Most foods that you purchase from the supermarket have a cost component brought about by paying Halal certification.
    As for churches paying tax, I would agree that church business enterprises should have to submit a tax return and be permitted to claim all normal concessions, including payments to charitable organisations.
    If you want to argue that churches should pay tax on collections received from church members, such income received from money on which tax has already been paid, then you also volunteer to be required to declare the value of every gift you receive from anyone and add the total value to your taxable income.
    Crowcrag
    27th Mar 2017
    11:00am
    We all know this is bollocks. But thrown mud sticks. Everyone looks for someone to blame when they are threatened, so nervous governments are happy to provide scapegoats, like Muslims, Asians, Chinese businessmen, and we boomers. Well, we should should make it very clear to this government that we are still a prodigious portion of voters. Get us offside at your peril, Turnbull, we are 'old and we are proud' to misquote a famous war cry.
    Adrianus
    27th Mar 2017
    11:22am
    It's interesting that we can go back to Howard's retirement incomes policy and totally forget about the damage done by Labor's 6 year reign of destruction.
    We now have a structural budget problem. We have many small employers struggling.
    By the time the Gillard government was booted they had taken our Commonwealth debt from 5% of GDP to almost 18% of GDP. What were they using as a benchmark? Paul Keatings 21%?
    jackyd
    27th Mar 2017
    12:22pm
    Commonwealth debt to GDP at December 2015 stood at 36.5%.
    Since then Commonwealth net debt has escalated to presently $550 Billion and would be right to say is out of control.
    This is the real concern, especially when a saving of just a few billion over 4 years is considered a breakthrough.
    A frightening fiscal future be holds us all.
    Kaz
    27th Mar 2017
    12:48pm
    You keep blaming labor Frank, but WA shows that the only claim to fame liberals had, managing money, is now gone.
    the_Albert
    27th Mar 2017
    1:14pm
    You've been called on this, Frank. What's your response? What do you have to say about the Abbott/Turnbull years of budget destruction? I'd also like to hear your views on the effect of the GFC with which the Labor government had to cope.
    KSS
    27th Mar 2017
    1:15pm
    jackyd and how much of that increase since to December 2015 is/was due to the legacy legislation pushed through by Mr Rudd/Ms Gillard/Mr Rudd knowing they would never have to pay for it? A good example of that is the NDIS, a totally unfunded and poorly thought out and commissioned program that few understand and few know how to claim. Meanwhile costs are increasing month on month, year on year.

    Now before you all get excited, I am NOT saying the NDIS was not needed or deserved. But it is also under the welfare banner and emotional knee jerking is useless when trying to analyse the issues and move forward. Something many on this site are incapable of doing.
    Adrianus
    27th Mar 2017
    1:43pm
    the Albert, the answer to your questions can be found by watching question time a few times. Labor just wants to get their hands on the money again. They want Australia to fail under this government.
    Why did taxpayers donate $millions to the unions? Why did we taxpayers donate $millions to the Clintons election fund? Why did we taxpayers borrow $500m to donate to the Global Education Fund? I could go on and on and on. But the bottom line is that there is no bottom line with a Labor Government.
    jackyd
    27th Mar 2017
    1:51pm
    KSS, I do agree and for that matter Gonski is far greater unfunded fiasco, especially when Shorten cries foul for cutting the funding when it was not there in the first place, not the point.
    Point being when does the blame game finish and mature fiscal management begin?
    Abbott tried to address the issue but got hounded and back stabbed out of office by the MSM and from within.
    Yes can blame Labor but now the populists Turnbull is equally to blame.
    jackyd
    27th Mar 2017
    2:42pm
    Albert, the GFC had a minimal effect in Australia due to the regulation of our banking sector, only those that had exposure in the financial market got a temporary kicks in the pants but that did recover.
    There was a $170 billion mining infrastructure boom happening across the country at that time as well and it was hard to get a tradey at a reasonable price for screaming.
    Adrianus
    27th Mar 2017
    4:53pm
    jackyd, I agree that we did not suffer the fallout as other countries did. I fail to see how set top boxes, pink batts, cash for clunkers, buying more Asian made white goods etc helped us at all? Big retailers seemed to do very well. There were around 10,000 jobs installing pink batts for 6 months then another 2,000 jobs uninstalling some. That's say around 12,000 over a year. The Abbott government's policy settings helped create 100,000 jobs in the first 12 months.
    Anonymous
    31st Mar 2017
    5:00pm
    Here they go again... the LNP trolls who conveniently ignore the fact that the Howard/Costello government blew the surplus with huge handouts, 90% of which benefited the richest 20%. The obligations they created had to then be met by the ensuing Labor government. Yes, Labor made some major spending mistakes, but the LNP has done a sterling job of running up debt to unprecedented proportions. And the Howard/Costello government is to blame for much of the debt Labor incurred because Labor had to maintain those huge tax cuts and other handouts to the rich.
    Will38
    27th Mar 2017
    11:38am
    This makes sense. But with the prospect of vast swathes of jobs disappearing in the future, even among some professions, governments may have to consider a universal payment to provide a reasonable standard of living for all. Then the challenge for the majority will be to find a sense of meaning in their lives beyond paid employment and our present materialistic culture. Bill
    Kaz
    27th Mar 2017
    12:54pm
    Exactly and we would do well to look at some good examples overseas because Australia is not good at future planning (except for Keating's super and Gillard's carbon tax).
    KSS
    27th Mar 2017
    1:52pm
    Will38 you ignore that there will be job in sectors not even thought about yet. Kids beginning school now will work in a vastly different world to that of their Grandparents (and even their parents). True some industries will undergo profound change but others will rise. People need to be ready and accept change. Those that don't will suffer as they have always done.
    Phil1943
    27th Mar 2017
    11:48am
    Kaye, you're right of course, but that doesn't mean tax treatment of big companies or any changes to pensions will display any characteristics other than political ones. Our current government feels safe in shouting "crisis" and whacking pensioners because they don't think their support base among the over 55s will dump them. The only thing that will change the pollies' attitude is for oldies to demonstrate their electoral strength by supporting someone else, and even that only improves our chances but doesn't convey any guarantees.
    andromeda143
    27th Mar 2017
    12:00pm
    A sensible article, well written. Moreover the analysis is correct.
    Culgoa
    27th Mar 2017
    12:08pm
    How about stopping the exorbitant allowances to past PMs . But then our gutless greed-driven political masters just don't have the guts.
    Poppa Bear
    27th Mar 2017
    12:13pm
    I realise that most people don't agree with religion, particularly Christianity, but your ranting includes small congregations where the minister makes less per year than most people earn in a month, and this money comes from the taxable income of the worshipers. there are no aged peoples' homes, flashy buildings etc. Do you also advocate the local footy club being taxed on dues paid by members? If you check it out, most small churches spend the money to help needy people. I don't know about big ones, but I am very familiar with small churches.
    Eddy
    27th Mar 2017
    4:51pm
    Poppa Bear, if you were responding to my post earlier please note I asked for tax on religious organisations business operations (not their income provided by private offerings or donations).
    Agreed most religious people are good people but there are those sheltering in religion who believe that a camel can walk through the eye of a needle.
    SWOZ
    27th Mar 2017
    12:18pm
    The Australian pension has always been too little to live on for those, who totally depend on it and should be substantially increased. To pay for those increases, the tax base needs to be raised by elimination negative gearing on other than new properties, full taxing of capital gains and a turnover tax on all foreign owned enterprises and on all local individuals and enterprises with accounts / subsidiaries in overseas tax havens. Eligibility for the pension can also be substantially reduced. All individuals living in a home worth more than $ 2 Million (current market value) are ineligible for a pension until they down-size. The $ 2 million is indexed for annual inflation only. All Australian residents entering Australia when 55 years old or older are ineligible for the pension. Their sponsoring children / grand children have to take full financial responsibility for them. Many of them currently receive full Australian pension benefits while owning multiple properties in their home countries (often worth millions of AU$), collect rent and often also receive overseas pensions into their country of origin bank accounts. Based on their total assets and income, they are ineligible for Australian pensions. However, since they are hidden overseas, they take full advantage of the Australian pensions and all other benefits that flow from holding a pension card.
    Gunner
    27th Mar 2017
    12:35pm
    Well said Kaye Fallick...and Hobbit is on target as well...BTW who is Tony Shepherd?
    feefifofum
    27th Mar 2017
    12:45pm
    A Liberal National Party Supporter - aka a Canberra Basher.

    He conducted a review into Government spending when Tony Abbott was PM - a large number of his recommendations are now becoming LNP policy.

    No doubt one of the large funder's of the Liberal Party - ensuring that his tax-dodging ways are fully supported by the current Government.
    Adrianus
    27th Mar 2017
    1:32pm
    He is an ex Scottish football player and as such deserves to be heard.
    Oldie84
    27th Mar 2017
    8:30pm
    Soccer, Frank :-)
    thommo
    27th Mar 2017
    12:53pm
    I've just retired (in 2014), and already the goal posts have been moved unfairly by changing the assets test, which has reduced my part age pension by $14K per year - an amount which I factored into my annual retirement income.
    The government didn't need to change the assets test, which is mean and nasty at the best of times, because as you say, Australia can afford a universal age pension for everyone over 65 years of age. Its just that this moronic hard-right conservative government pretends it has to kick the poor and vulnerable to pay for the mythical budget deficit, instead of targeting the big end of town to contribute their fair share to bolster the coffers..
    This government will get the 'flick' at the next election, but Labor won't necessarily get back in either unless it does more for pensioners.
    Kaz
    27th Mar 2017
    12:57pm
    Agreed
    Kaz
    27th Mar 2017
    1:00pm
    Shepherd says pensioners feel entitled - that's the pot calling the kettle black! Really, people listen to him AND he gets paid for that garbage?
    Oldie84
    27th Mar 2017
    1:01pm
    Talk about prejudice.... I have no idea who Tony Shepherd is but this is his open ion. Instead of heaping manure on him refute his argument logically. If you can't do this in a civil fashion shut up.
    Fisherman
    27th Mar 2017
    1:48pm
    Tony has shares in the defence industry projects, so their funding is far more important than OAP and other services. The LNP stopped the resource rent tax, designed to give Australians a fair share of the wealth of our natural resources. Why is it Norway and other Scandinavian countries have managed to create sovereign wealth funds for all their population, and pay for all their social services? It is not as if this pension growth issue wasn't recognized earlier! Or are we now controlled by the same zionists, who pretend to be jews, and who now control USA and UK?
    anonysubscribe
    27th Mar 2017
    2:21pm
    we do not lack the political will to change. we are so deeply in bed with big and small business, beholden to their disdainful contempt of social parasites that ultimately the whole citizenry will form that group while a bunyip aristocracy reasserts its unfairly gained supremecy in spite of the best of western civilised evolution after the 2nd world war gave us a social consicence. Matgaret Thatcher led to vapid fellow travellers onboth sides of the political spectrum. Now we can no longer distinguish pigs from humans as we all work ourselves to death in the crazy animal farm that Australia is descending to.
    Travelling Man
    27th Mar 2017
    2:52pm
    Mr Shepherd is tending the wrong sheep this time. If this moronic Tony Abbott gofer keeps bleating this type of hyperbolical bombast he'll find his crook rammed right up where the sun doesn't shine hook first!
    floss
    27th Mar 2017
    3:01pm
    Sorry Frank your figures are not correct.
    Adrianus
    27th Mar 2017
    4:38pm
    Thanks for pointing that out looney. Can you supply the correct figures please?
    SwineViolet
    27th Mar 2017
    3:31pm
    Shepherd echoes the Abbott mantra and is not based in reality. Those of us who are baby boomers have worked hard to be where we are today and it is not a stretch to expect that there be something in retirement that will make the last part of our lives acceptable. I will be a self funded retiree and have made decisions to ensure that I can live decently, however I have longevity in my family so am likely to live until my mid to late 90s. Should I run out of money when I am 90 having worked until I am 70 since age 16 then I believe the government (after all that is all of us) can afford to keep me!

    What is always missing from these silly debates is that retirees spend money, so the more they have then they will apply this to their lifestyle thus making a difference in a positive sense to the economy. Surely this is what is required rather than the nonsense that we can't afford Age Pensions. Keep speaking up and out! Virginia
    feefifofum
    27th Mar 2017
    5:51pm
    Agree!!!!!
    floss
    27th Mar 2017
    4:47pm
    Will do Frank oops they have just turned off the power can't afford the bill.
    Adrianus
    27th Mar 2017
    5:05pm
    During the Labor government power prices went up 100%. I got myself a wood fired stove but I have to keep an eye out for the Greenies when collecting firewood.
    East of Toowoomba
    27th Mar 2017
    5:36pm
    With regard to churches paying tax, yes 10% tax would be substantial but have you considered that although they don't have to pay tax many religious bodies provide charity to the poor and undervalued members of our society. Think Salvation Army, St Vincent de Paul, City Mission and many others that I am aware of.
    LiveItUp
    27th Mar 2017
    9:58pm
    There are just as many that use the church as a way to wealth too. Remember the good Lord always provides those who worship him. Boy does he provide for some.
    floss
    27th Mar 2017
    6:24pm
    Frank you sound like a chip off the old block, would you like the L.N.P. figures or the real ones.
    RUSTY
    27th Mar 2017
    10:02pm
    Im sick and tired having our age group (baby boomers) being labelled a drain on the current society. My parents along with all parents of this age group were told by the Government at the time the wars over, the country NEEDS future population so go forth and multiply.
    Our age group have contributed more than enough to build this country to where we are now.
    ALL Governments, since we were born, have known that in 60 years the Baby Boomers will be coming in to retirement so what a thank you we have received. Many of us have not had the time frame to build a large Super nest egg so need help with a pension to be able to live comfortably. How short sighted if all these Governments have not planned ahead to be able to support us when we need it as they are panning well ahead to make sure our children DONT have access to anything when they retire.
    GeorgeM
    28th Mar 2017
    1:42pm
    Kaye, thanks for highlighting with your opening sentence that "When it comes to so-called ‘retirement affordability’ the truth of the matter is that we can afford a pension for all.".

    This fellow, Tony Shepherd, is a creep who can never be believed, and anyone who hires him for any advice must be of the same type.

    All Australians who paid taxes for say 20 years here should be automatically entitled to the full Age Pension which we all contributed for through taxes.

    Businesses and rich are not paying enough - it is time Australia brought in an ALTERNATIVE MINIMUM TAX (AMT) which USA has had since 1969 (which forced Trump to pay $38Mil tax in 2005),and is also there in otter countries such as Canada - by disallowing all deductions and putting say 15-20% tax on all income.
    Vonveevee
    25th Jul 2017
    11:16am
    Hello,
    Everyone is in a different circumstance. I myself am 71 and still working full time as I cannot afford to retire. So much of my super went in the GFC and as a single parent with no help form anyone I have struggled all my life, and have worked for 55 years...I would really like a little help from the Govt. when I retire after all so many young ones out there on the dole havent worked a day! It is not because I didnt plan it was because I couldnt...