23rd Apr 2014
Horror cuts to come
Author: Kaye Fallick
Horror cuts to come

The last three weeks leading up to the May Budget feel like Groundhog Day as even more leaked horror cuts hit the headlines. In addition, rumours abound as to the contents of the final report of the Commission of Audit, due for release in the next few days. Yesterday we heard ‘confirmation’ that the Minister for Health, Peter Dutton had signed off on a minimum $6 out-of-pocket fee for visits to the GP. On Saturday The Australian newspaper ‘confirmed’ that the family home would not be included in an Age Pension assets test, as had been rumoured, but that the Government “would, instead, focus on lifting the retirement age to 70”. The same report ruled out any plans to cut the existing pension but said that “consideration is being given to changing the rate of indexation for age pension payments”. So is this a cut which is not a cut? For those who are confused, this seems to indicate that the base rate of the Age Pension (singles, $766 per fortnight, couples $577.40 each per fortnight) would remain the same, but the current system of benchmarking indexed pensions to 27.7 per cent of the male total average weekly earnings (MTAWE) twice per year may be revised, with perhaps a lower measure being applied when reviewing pension increases.

Confused? We don’t blame you.

Read more at The Australian website.

Read more at the Sydney Morning Herald website


Opinion: The real costs of retirement

By now, if you are aged 50 or over, you are probably feeling a drain on the nation’s resources, a burden on the budget, someone who should simply get out of the way so the next generation can come through unhindered by your debt, your waste, your environmental carnage, your tendency to have medical concerns and your total failure to retire on two or three million dollars per year.

What WERE YOU THINKING???

Working for 30 or 40 years, paying taxes, raising your family, funding infrastructure such as kindergartens and universities, roads and airports for younger generations along the way.

YOU SELFISH OLD FOOL!

Couldn’t you see that you and your friends would benefit from medical science, grow older and stick around longer? And that what was once a social security safety net – the old Age Pension – would become an ‘entitlement’ which could be plucked away – or reduced by a thousand cuts?

So the pre-budget softening process is in full swing and if we are told that the age of entitlement is over one more time, we really will have to say the Treasurer is nagging.

So it’s time to allow some facts to get in the way of the great con job currently underway.

Firstly, as noted by the Australia Institute yesterday, there is more than one way to skin a cat. Rather than cutting back on the safety net for the poorest in our society, why not extend this safety net to all – but cut back on current ‘entitlements’ in the form of superannuation concessions which appear to favour the rich?

Secondly, it is worth highlighting the fact that our superannuation fees – that is the money that goes to the Big Four banks and AMP, to a large extent – are the third highest in the developed world – that’s right, apart from Spain and Mexico, we are paying more per head than almost any other rich nation for the privilege of sharing our retirement savings with a large financial institution.

In fact the annual fees on our retirement savings are $18.6 billion - $1075 per head; equal to the annual amount paid out by Medicare on our health bills. If that isn’t crazy, please tell me what is? So let’s say that the Government, instead of pushing 65-year-olds to work for an additional five years – whether in sickness, health, or disability – turned its attention to the real cost of retirement – the fees our financial services institutions are earning. And given there is about 1.7 trillion in investment in superannuation, let’s say we applied a small social security fee – say 1 per cent - to these funds. That would net $17 billion within a year – and soon add up to a sizeable amount that could be invested in a future fund which easily covers universal age pensions until the generation which has had a Superannuation Guarantee Contribution since day one of their working lives hits retirement.

In short, it’s time the policy makers stopped looking only at the poor, the defenseless and the disabled as the easy targets for budget cuts. Any government which is serious about balancing the books needs to look at both sides of the ledger – and corporate profits on retirement savings should be first on the list.

What do you think? Should the Age Pension be changed? If so would you raise the age of those who receive it? Change the indexation? Or include the family home in the assets test?

And are the big banks getting away scot free when it comes to paying their share?





    COMMENTS

    To make a comment, please register or login
    yakillinme
    23rd Apr 2014
    9:59am
    As usual the Banks seem teflon coated when it comes to charging fees.
    Anonymous
    23rd Apr 2014
    12:53pm
    If you abdicate your finances to someone else like a bank - pay the fees.

    We are NOT forced to use the rent-seekers wanting to charge you fees and can do it ourselves. We have the freedom of choice to take it away from them.
    Anonymous
    23rd Apr 2014
    3:44pm
    A SYNOPSIS OF THE MAJORITY OF POSTERS TO THIS SITE

    (With due regard to the FEW who have not had the required opportunities during their lives – or who gratefully understand and accept their lot).

    VICTIMS…
    I trusted the government to look after me because I could not be bothered to help myself. And any money I have in Super gets ripped off by the banks and finance advisors so even though I could learn and take control of it myself, that would take effort and it is just easier to leave it there and blame someone else. Why do I have NO CONTROL over my life and the government seems to hate me?

    DENIERS…
    I know the government changes the rules all the time, I saw it all my life, but it is someone else’s fault now that I did not take any interest in ensuring I could retire when I chose to, with the amount of money I need weekly.

    BLAMERS…
    It is the fault of all those people who spent their time learning about investing and tax rules, or are politicians with perks, or business people who know the rules that are to blame for my predicament in retirement. They have all the money and I have nothing – for reasons that I refuse to acknowledge.

    IMPROVISERS…
    I should have done some planning during my lifetime – I wish I had actually ASKED someone how much a pensioner (does NOT) get per fortnight - BEFORE I hit 65.

    REGRETS…
    I know now I should have done some financial planning and saving when I had the income to do so – but going OS or on holiday, buying boats and cars, houses, toys, eating out, going out, those expensive private schools, etc ,were all more important. BUT now as I haven’t the required resources, all I have left is frustration - and I need to take that out on someone (see BLAMERS, VICTIMS, DENIAL, etc).

    FINANCIAL NAIVETY…
    I have no idea how investments, taxes and government operates, but that is NOT my problem – the government is there to look after me – aren’t they – surely - PLEASE?

    ENTITLEMENT EXPECTATION…
    I paid my taxes therefore I should get to live my retirement in the manner I was accustomed. It is not my problem to understand the government spent all my tax money on aged pensioners of the day - and other government benefits, infrastructure, etc, I received and used all my life before retiring. The government banked all my money so it was ready for my retirement – didn’t they – tell me they did - please?

    MOST POSTERS HERE ARE REAL SHOCKERS - BUT - THERE IS SOME HOPE OF REDEMPTION…
    Use what you know and teach your grand kids, or others, how not to repeat your mistakes!
    Anonymous
    23rd Apr 2014
    9:23pm
    Harvs - any respect I had for you is gone with your excessive zeal in over-generalising. I see no value in any statement you've made.
    Anonymous
    23rd Apr 2014
    9:39pm
    > Not everybody got a sweet ride.

    > The pension is a bought and paid for option out of taxes.

    > The pension is a right not a gift, and is not open to negotiation or amendment at whim by politicians ,who cannot handle a budget.

    > Pension eligibility is bounded ONLY by the ability of the potential recipient to earn income - in which case the pension is reduced until it reaches zero at a pretty good level of income.

    > IF there is any need to review pension entitlements - it should be in the context of a thorough review of any who have assets etc which will permit income gathering.

    > People who rely on the pension - at last view 51% of retired men and 42% of retired women - in the majority of cases did NOT waste their time etc sitting on the beaches - they are just part of the growing demographic of those deliberately disadvantaged by the same government of both sides that has been intent on ruining them since the 1980's.

    > If YOU have the answer - hand them all sort-arse jobs NOW so they can work until they are seventy, while their 'betters' and wonderful managers of MY country holiday on the Riviera out of the public purse.

    > Ad hominem and personal insult are the last refuge of those who cannot sustain an argument on fact, so kindly stick to facts and valid argument.
    Anonymous
    23rd Apr 2014
    10:41pm
    .
    .
    .
    .
    No point getting indignant, none of it was an insult - just an impartial, accurate and objective observation about many people who post here.

    The.Grappler many of these observations might uncomfortably fit YOU - and that is why you will WANT and NEED to see no value in what is written.

    My most interesting observation in my time on these forums is that many would learn most from PIXAPD and Young Simmo – they actually understand the basic rules of the game.

    Cheers
    Kopernicus
    24th Apr 2014
    7:24pm
    What a litany of arrogant twaddle Harvs. Let me re frame your synopsis and make the government it's subject.

    VICTIMS ..........
    Oh Dear! Oh No! Poor me! The sky's fallen in! The cupboard is bare!
    (yes, triple AAA credit rating and lowest debt in the G20 means nothing)
    We have to save the nation ie those doing OK, by flogging the weak, poor and disabled!

    DENIERS ....
    Oh no, we don't have an agenda. All our committees of inquiry are totally impartial and have not been purposefully selected for their views being identical to ours. We DO NOT support the big end of town exclusively!

    BLAMERS.....

    Those old bastards, the dole bludgers, the retards, the cripples and the psycho's are really gonna stuff it for everyone, especially the well off who really need the high middle class top up.

    IMPROVISERS .......
    Well, we've stacked the enquiry into climate change, the economy, lied about our commitment to education and the disabled. Let's 'review' education, NBN, Anything! - as long as it's in our style that guarantees results.

    REGRETS ...........
    Those elections promises are a real drag, we can't believe we felt forced to say all that crap we don't believe in.. After calling Julia a liar 10,000 times, we can't stand the idea of being called the same, so we have to use some care, unfortunately. But wait till the next election!

    FINANCIAL NAIVETE .....
    Yep, we am decreasing govt earnings by deleting carbon and mining taxes, cause we hate them and we're putting in a very xsy parental leave scheme cause high earners deserve to get more, even if they may need it less.
    No, we will NOT consider ANY new ways of raising income - we prefer just cuts! (to the burdensome dregs of society).

    ENTITLEMENT EXPECTATION ............

    No, no good for health, welfare, education, pensions, the unemployed - they all get too much and they are still not happy! Where will it end?

    Good for high income benefits, like current cut offs for family benefits A & B, super tax offsets, no tax for super>$100k, low capital gain tax which ups price of housing etc etc etc etc etc etc.

    THERE IS NO HOPE OF REDEMPTION.
    If views like yours Harvs rule, that will be the case. People will end up where you think they deserve, based on a premise that the system is actually fair. It's the dog eat dog fair version of the market place and is NOT the view that we are a society, a community. The safety net for the less well off is a strong marker of that. For this govt that has no meaning other than a burdensome weight to be diminished asap - as against raising more income and reducing lurks for the well off instead. They look to the big end of town for the measure of their success.

    How much can you eat Harvs, beyond obesity ain't good.
    Ny19
    24th Apr 2014
    8:13pm
    Top comment Kopernicus.
    Harvs you do sound very arrogant!
    Young Simmo
    24th Apr 2014
    8:20pm
    Kopernicus, we are an English speaking country, it would be good if you could communicate with the English Language, so we would all Know what your dribble is about.
    Oop's.
    Anonymous
    24th Apr 2014
    8:59pm
    Kopernicus and Ribiconda – arrogance is an inflated opinion of one’s own ability or importance. On the point of importance, I would only consider myself as one opinion amongst many, but I make no apology if that opinion challenges the very foundation of what they are saying. As to my own abilities – I know what I know - and keep constantly learning – I pass after that.

    Kopernicus – you have no argument from me on the merits of present or past governments and your twist on my post has some points of virtue.

    I always like to concentrate my major efforts on the battles where government rule changes can have major impacts on my family and importantly – one’s that I can likely win and mostly control. You are taking on the whole of government - so are a braver person than me.

    Whilst I do have strong views on social and environmental issues, I also work very hard on ensuring I understand, pre-empt and manage those areas where governments can affect my family’s present and future prosperity – because I don’t expect - and fully realise - that no-one else will.
    Kopernicus
    24th Apr 2014
    9:23pm
    Simmo, I am bemused you could not understand my very plain English. Did "Kopernicus" seem too unfamiliar and put you off balance? He is the guy that promoted the then crazy notion that the planets went round the sun, not the other way round. I'm sure you would have dribbled at that then.
    Ny19
    24th Apr 2014
    9:41pm
    Harvs, I take your point but nevertheless your comment sounded arrogant. You categorise people in a put down way. You derided people and their genuine concerns by neatly categorising them into labels under the heading of "A Synopsis of the majority of posters to this site". You called them "victims", "deniers", "blamers", "improvisers", "regretful", "having financial naïvety" and "entitlement expectation". Further you add in capital letters " MOST POSTERS HERE ARE REAL SHOCKERS -BUT - THERE IS SOME HOPE OF REDEMPTION....." You don't think this crap is arrogant? I loved Kopernicus's response to you because he twisted your arrogant nonsense into humane sense.
    Kopernicus
    24th Apr 2014
    10:09pm
    Harvs, don't try and get off lightly, your opinion did not 'challenge' many others, it simply diminished, ridiculed and disparaged them, by means of a contrived and headlined list of negatives - a judgement call of some length and complexity. So don't back away from it. It's far easier to criticize a government than what you did, for me at least, but thanks you for the template.

    If yours is an opinion amongst many, I wonder bout the circles you mix in 'cause that's the opposite for me. I guess we all choose our friends.

    If you have concerns about rule changes - so do I, but I don't think we're on the same page about that. I appreciate your imperative to ensure your family's prosperity - that's common for most of us. However, it's all a bit of a nimby reaction for most of us. The reality for this country as a whole is a growing wealth disparity with Howard's instituted tax cuts and benefits reducing takings by ~$30 bill pa - equal to ~$300 bill since. 80% are reputed to have gone to the pockets of the well off - hence this peppers my response to your post - it's not as simple as it seems. There are under currant$ you will never hear about from St Aloysius alumni like Joe Hockey.

    What's at stake here is a strong series of hints of impending change. This is fuelled by biased 'analysisis' that has been kept hidden, an ideology that has corrupted impartial assessment of status quo and future direction providing us with spin instead as a very questionable justification.
    Anonymous
    24th Apr 2014
    11:45pm
    Kopernicus – that was refreshingly more articulate – and backing away, I am often told, is not one of my virtues. Those points of mine are nothing more than everyday human traits that we ALL demonstrate at times – I did not have to bother to contrive them. Therefore your use of the word ‘subjective’ is invalidated by your definition. But they sure can make us ALL feel uncomfortable when having to face up to them.

    To be “diminished, ridiculed and disparaged” you would have to identify yourself with what is written. As I wrote most - not all – those that did not identify with the headings were not offended. As you stated “your opinion did not 'challenge' many others”, and so far I would agree – it has only been you Kopernicus - and a couple of others.

    To no doubt make the situation worse, if you read all the posts, there are 2 broad categories of people who post here. Those who problem solve and seek to improve their lot on their own, using whatever resources are available to them - and those that are not inclined to do so and basically hope for divine intervention.

    The problem solvers will use whatever reasonable means at their disposal to survive and hopefully prosper, despite the government or others. Those not inclined to do so will seek ways to get assistance from the government or wherever.

    Each group will definitely frustrate the other – because they are simply at opposite poles.

    One of the groups will pre-empt and adapt to changing circumstances – even though they might not like it – but they refuse to be victims of their own lethargy - and plan their next move and execute that plan accordingly.

    The other group will expect someone else to do that work for them. When that divine intervention does not appear or is not to their liking, I leave it to your imagination, or to possibly something I have written, as to who should be responsible - and why.

    One group will have an entitlement attitude to the taxes they pay in terms of the aged pension, etc – the other group will consider that the responsibility is mostly or completely theirs. One group will consider all sorts of welfare to be their right – the other group will consider welfare to be a safety net and fall back if really necessary.

    So, in answer to your question about the circles I and others like me hang about in - compared to you – I will let you guess which of the two groups I fall into.

    In finishing - I agree - we all need to stay eternally vigilant about what our ruling elite say and do.

    23rd Apr 2014
    10:23am
    I am thankful for whatever pension I get...if the Govt needs to make changes, so be it..I will still be thankful. The Govt supply my flat and then give me money to pay the rent...I've got it made
    ray from Bondi
    23rd Apr 2014
    1:01pm
    that seems a posting from somebody who livs in a mansion and would never have to worry about shopping for himself
    moke
    23rd Apr 2014
    2:08pm
    PIXAPD sounds like you have it made, but not all can get cheap government accommodation, the waiting list is about 5 years. So don't you realise you are getting a lot more than many pensioners, if it is your own home there are many rates to pay not only are you lucky but many pensioners worked and payed their taxes so you could have your government accommodation much cheaper than if you rented from the normal source e.g. real estate agents or privately then your rent would be so much more you would also be looking at the cuts being made.
    Anonymous
    23rd Apr 2014
    9:41pm
    So you paid all those taxes all those years, part of which was for welfare programs including pension, so that some jerk with no idea of reality and a fat wallet out of those same taxes can dictate to you that you will take it or leave it?

    Can't help you, but don't stand in the way.
    MITZY
    24th Apr 2014
    9:53am
    PIXAPD doesn't vote but receives a pension and rental benefits so is quite a happy chappy with his lot.
    heyyybob
    24th Apr 2014
    10:33am
    or...."I'm alright Jack". Glad you're not my neighbour :(
    Anonymous
    24th Apr 2014
    11:02am
    Voting or not voting has nothing to do with receiving the pension, nothing at all, and the jealousy of many of you is amazing, maybe if you stopped boozing and or smoking and gambling you'd have some money left from your pensions
    MITZY
    24th Apr 2014
    11:10am
    PIXAPD you're generalising again, its hard to stop drinking/smoking/gambling etc. when you never got started in the first place. That's a poor assumption when there are dozens of reasons why some people are in a "poor" situation.
    heyyybob
    23rd Apr 2014
    10:24am
    ...............becoming more speechless as we get closer to this friggin BUDGET !$!!#!@!%$!..........:(
    Anonymous
    25th Apr 2014
    3:40pm
    Why
    Young Simmo
    25th Apr 2014
    3:50pm
    There's no profit in becoming speechless, just ask Clive Palmer.
    Kali-G
    23rd Apr 2014
    10:29am
    Sadly this government is no better than the labor before.
    They all waste money and screw the people they should be serving!
    For instance, when Rudd was foreign minister he gave $80 Million dollars to Sudan....only to see that money buy guns and the country split into 2. Muslim and christian.
    10 days ago our new foreign minister Julie Bishop gave another 50 Million dollars to Sudan...we dont even know which one? LOL
    Yet nobody asks why do we waste our money on these hopeless causes.
    But Hockey is happy to punish the pensioners!
    Go Mr Palmer!
    ray from Bondi
    23rd Apr 2014
    1:14pm
    no better than labor, at least labor was a little to right of the far far LEFT of the Libs, the Government, ultra rich, and big business continue to rape the average Australian, there would be more than enough for all if the government had control of telstra, Qantas, the airports, The commonwealth Bank and numerous other industries that insured then then governments that did care about Austral could control business instead of sitting there with them laughing at the ants tolling around the base of the pyramids
    moke
    23rd Apr 2014
    2:17pm
    Ray regardless of which government we have if they owned all those businesses they would just have more money to hand out overseas, already we are suffering because of their generosity to the overseas poor, they forget there are many in a similar situation here. I heard to day that the government are so cash strapped that they are going to purchase a number of the latest fighting planes costing millions or billions of dollars. I expect this is so they can look good when another country goes to war and of course we will be ready. The whole lot make me sick. I was reared with the idea that charity begins at home. Don't think any of our pollys heard that one.
    Jurassicgeek
    23rd Apr 2014
    3:21pm
    unfortunately the money trail does not stop there... currently we supply about 4 billion in aid ..mostly to countries run by corrupt regimes...I wonder where the money goes and wether the money would be better sent at home...
    Switch
    23rd Apr 2014
    10:31am
    What is the current cost to Australians from retired politicians entitlements. What can be done to income test their pensions.
    Gra
    23rd Apr 2014
    8:52pm
    It is a shame we never hear much about that. Politicians care for themselves very well and never seem to take the knife to their own entitlements, which in my opinion are grossly over the top. What a rort when they can serve the minimum term required to qualify for the pension, retire from politics and start drawing that pension straight away - regardless of their age (ie; no need to wait until they are 65), then be elected again a little later on serve another few terms and qualify for a second pension. That is totally unacceptable.

    23rd Apr 2014
    10:33am
    The Govt not only supply my unit to live in they then supply the money for me to pay them the rent, and not only that they then supply me with rent assistance; I mean what more could I ask for.....and folks like me are supposed to complain ? come on now..... some people in this country do not know how well off they are.
    Pass the Ductape
    23rd Apr 2014
    10:51am
    Thanks for your support PIXAPD. Cheques in the mail.

    Regards... Tony
    heyyybob
    23rd Apr 2014
    11:14am
    This has been a paid advertisment, the recipient is NO WAY responsible for his/her life ;)
    Patriot
    23rd Apr 2014
    1:07pm
    Another one of their "PAID PUPPETS".
    ray from Bondi
    23rd Apr 2014
    1:15pm
    paid pupit, so obvious
    KSS
    23rd Apr 2014
    1:55pm
    Just because you disagree with PIXAPD there is no need to be so rude Ductape, heyyybob, Patriot and ray.

    You know there are actually people who are doing ok under the current arrangements but when they dare to say so on this site they are abused for it. That is bullying and has no place here (or anywhere).
    moke
    23rd Apr 2014
    2:22pm
    Oh my OH my how nice it is to be able to skite of how well you use the system, Why not keep it to your self many oldies are not so lucky and would appreciate to be in you position.
    Anonymous
    23rd Apr 2014
    3:09pm
    Perhaps if folks stopped spending money on drink, cigarettes and gambling they might have some money left over ? And as for 'using the system' let's revert to the reasoning of some of you naysayers. I worked 50 years, paid tax. Retired on newstart before 65 and did 15 hours a week with the Rural Fire Brigade I am a member of, most brigades are classed as being a charity. Then found I had cancer so went on the DSP...all the time still paying 100's a week in private rental. After being on the Housing register for some years, the wait in my region is up to 12 years; I was made an offer not for a 1 bedroom uni as I asked for, but for a bedsitter which I took. Now I do not care if any of you jokers do not like me saying I am doing ok on the aged pension as I do not apologise to any of you or to anyone else. I am satisfied with food and clothing and thank God for my home; and the chemo is going ok so far
    minnie
    23rd Apr 2014
    3:10pm
    I have to agree with Ductape, heyyybob, Patriot and Ray - PIXAPD seems to have a lot more going for him that any other pensioner I know. I imagine the people living on the street are only 'there because of choice' if it's all such a swan and easy with pensioners? Sorry can't see it, with the rents people are paying the shortage of rental properties all over the country city and country, there are many many people unable to find a place to live or make ends meet.
    archer
    23rd Apr 2014
    9:34pm
    So pixapd. How come you get rent assistance if you have a government flat. Just wondering. No wonder your cruzing along and good luck to you if u can get that extra benefit
    heyyybob
    24th Apr 2014
    10:48am
    This little debate (as pointless as it is) has provided a lot of straight shooting, including those from Pixapd (read all of his) so to call some of them 'bullying' is silly. Its just that its getting warmer in the 'kitchen' so, KSS, toughen up Princess :)
    MITZY
    24th Apr 2014
    11:06am
    PIXAPD there are many reasons why people receiving the full age pension have no back-up moneys and therefore struggle and would be devastated by the innuendo and non-factual build-up of a fat cat like Joe Hockey's deliberations. Life is not kind to everyone. You've said what you said above many times before re cigarettes, drink and gambling and this applies to only some people. Others have health and mental health issues and disabilities and disabilities cause them to outlay funds on their health. Not all is provided by the generosity of the taxpayers.
    Harvs: above likewise, your post lacks compassion.
    Anonymous
    24th Apr 2014
    12:16pm
    MITZY - this is not a site purely for the disabled. There will be those people here and I ALWAYS caveat what I write accordingly.

    BUT - if you own a home you have potential assets and could be asset-rich. If you do not have enough money and still do nothing with those assets that you live in - because it is what you are leaving to your kids, or it is your lifestyle, or your friends all live around you, or whatever, AND you have not tried to find a solution to your problem using those assets in a different way – then Correct - I have NO compassion. You are your own victim!

    If you rent then you need to talk to PIXAPD or Young Simmo about how they problem solved a similar situation.

    YOU are ONLY a VICTIM if you CHOOSE to be in the main.
    Pass the Ductape
    23rd Apr 2014
    10:48am
    We can talk and argue about it all we like....we're still about to get screwed! So what's changed?
    Anonymous
    23rd Apr 2014
    9:44pm
    Only if we take it and forget to say NO! and mean it. Pensioners Party anyone? Let's get stuck into them for real for a change.
    Kato
    23rd Apr 2014
    10:50am
    It is about time an independent unit is set up to monitor politicians. promises always broken, but never to the big end of town, can't come up with a credible solution let alone idea to solve youth unemployment , so guess what the future holds for those poor buggers.Now more and more corruption is coming to the surface from all sides of politics. Can even our leaders be looked at with anything but mistrust. The sacrifices our elders made to make this country has been tarnished by such people, I hope you hang your heads in shame this weekend as we remember them. oh sorry you don't have to hang your head if you have no conscience do you LEADERS.

    23rd Apr 2014
    10:50am
    I am surprised that a successful entrepreneur as Kate continually attacks free enterprise and the coalition government . Instead of trying to frightened the older readers , who given that the majority of voters supported the coalition would be at least similarly represented on this site , by spreading rumours . Report on the facts none of which we will know until the budget comes out.
    You do not report to your readers for instance the advantages of a SMSF so avoiding fees from Union funds or Financial Institutuions.
    or the lost billions in super going back to govt coffers .
    I do hope we taxpayers are at least charging Ms Fallick for use of the Centrlink mailing list to attract all these advertisers aimed at us oldies .
    Anonymous
    23rd Apr 2014
    11:53am
    Why is the looney left as in the Australia institute suggesting that instead of us saving for our own retirement and being encouraged too we should all go on a non means tested pension . Duh tell Paul Keating.
    At the moment Employers pay in 9.25 of an employees salary up to a max salary of 178,000 a year .
    This is paid into a super fund where the govt rips of 15 per cent of your savings so you have less to retire on where in any stretch is this a concession it is Orwellian speak .
    Is this a campaign by miss Fellick and other employers to get out of funding super and pass it over to taxpayers to fund and not means tested ?
    Why else would this site be promoting such rubbish .
    ray from Bondi
    23rd Apr 2014
    1:19pm
    all rejoice, out master have increased out chocolate ration from 10grams to 5grams .. all rejoice in their generosity
    Anonymous
    23rd Apr 2014
    9:44pm
    Because they can do figures which Joe Hockey obviously can't.
    Anonymous
    23rd Apr 2014
    10:17pm
    Not sure I understand you . You first of all are not contributing to your own super your employer is . Then if I understand the Looney left they are complaining that they are not paying enough tax on this contribution .
    No wonder labors vote is down to one in five , they are all as thick as bricks.
    SolJesse
    23rd Apr 2014
    11:02am
    What was that movie called, the one where all over a certain age were disposed of.
    Then there was 'Soylent Green" That was a good idea, grinding us down to make food the the mass!!!
    ray from Bondi
    23rd Apr 2014
    1:19pm
    what have you done, this idea was being kept quite
    FrankC
    23rd Apr 2014
    1:56pm
    That movie was called 'Logan's Run'. They were taken into a circular area, then somehow lifted upwards, never to be seen again. That was a series on TV in the early or mid sixties.
    Patriot
    23rd Apr 2014
    2:28pm
    Sounds psychopathic enough for the Government "Run With".
    Gra
    23rd Apr 2014
    8:54pm
    SolJesse, you are right, it was Soylent Green. I remember seeing that way back - probably about 30 years ago.
    Troubadour
    23rd Apr 2014
    11:17am
    For sure Corporate profits on super savings should be the first in line - as you rightly say they are earning BIG bucks yearly. We as Aged Pensioners on a basic pension are not making anything - in fact losing if our meagre savings drop below a certain amount.
    The profits Banks and big Corporations are making is obscene and should be used to fund things Nationally.
    MarLin
    23rd Apr 2014
    11:23am
    Hey PIXAPD - I'd be careful if I were you. Judging by their record to date, this gov't will leave no stone unturned (apart from their own perks, of course) to grab every dollar they can - including yours!
    Anonymous
    23rd Apr 2014
    12:41pm
    Not anxious about anything and I intend to stay one step ahead of the Govt. Most folks when they wake in the morning exclaim, 'Good Lord morning' but I say 'Good morning Lord' so that's the difference
    MarLin
    23rd Apr 2014
    2:13pm
    Good for you, PIXAPD - and GOOD LUCK (because you'll need it to stay one step ahead of these greedy sods!).
    Young Simmo
    23rd Apr 2014
    6:05pm
    Well PIXAPD, me and Mum are in a similar happy situation. We live in an onsite caravan with extra large annex and bathroom and pay $115.00 per week plus power. We have been here since Feb1999, and although we get an extra $118 / fortnight to look after my darling we can save $200 to $300 per fortnight. Car rego and insurances etc are not a problem, and our place is a lot easier to clean and maintain than a million dollar house. Owned 3 new houses in our life time but couldn't be happier now. I also enjoy my 6 or so cans each night, stopped smoking in 2000, so without any plans just managed to do things the right way.
    OK I am ready for the barrage.
    Anonymous
    23rd Apr 2014
    8:13pm
    Young Simmo, you are much like PIXAPD – you know how to and are relaxed with managing change and adapting to your varying circumstances. You are both very good at living comfortably and being at peace with what you have, and have a rare skill it appears, as you both know how to budget and save regardless. My guess is you could teach other people lots!

    As you say Young Simmo, you have had houses and now live in an onsite caravan. You have adapted your available income to a lifestyle that is certainly not uncomfortable and you have money to spare for other purposes. Others who think similarly will move to small country towns or even overseas to ensure they can live comfortably within their available income.

    It is too easy to whine and do nothing - so well done. If you get any barrage as you indicated, it SHOULD be with good positive questions about how others could learn from you regarding how to make ends meet!
    genimi
    23rd Apr 2014
    11:50am
    Wouldn't mind some sort of guarantee? about jobs for those forced to put off retirement or those whose disability pensions are about to be attacked! It is all very well to say people can work longer or that the disabled can work part time, but who the hell is going to employ them? So therefore the true savings will be the difference between pension rate and newstart rate. how the hell is that going to save the budget?
    ray from Bondi
    23rd Apr 2014
    1:27pm
    Every time I hear the phrase “let them work longer” I just about drown in latte, it is well known fact that teenage school leavers can not find meaningful work, and 1 hour a week is not working ( thouhg our masters seem to think a person is fully employed), people from 30 start having troubles and anybody over 50 not a politician can not find meaningful work again, and once over 60 it is near impossible, all lower classes of work are going overseas, so just what are the tired old feed-up people going to do after being made redundant and what they worked at all their life is now in India. The only people who can access their pension early is politicians, and then they have made so much out of serving the people they do not need it, a nice seat on a board anybody
    minnie
    23rd Apr 2014
    3:19pm
    They don't care about getting jobs, it's MONEY. There should be certain professions not allowed to be MPs, one are Bankers, all they can think of is to make more money and sell assests... which is something we don't want in a government.

    This government are like a Bank, but one that gives to their own pockets and that of their friends without any investment in the country at large. Putting money into Education (investing in our future), money into the aged (caring for taxpayers who provided taxes for infrastructure in the past and into the future), money into the disabled (to care for those who need a hand and help them live meaningful lives), money into communications (well that's been binned too).

    By taking money away from all the investment and care, it is going into corporations and mining companies which want to make our country one giant quarry. It's time to 'block supply' I think, before it's too late.
    Not surprised
    23rd Apr 2014
    12:35pm
    Please name any Liberal government that has ever looked after the worker on a comparable basis with their big business mates: anathema! Apart from those networks, you also need to recognise that there is a philosophy of sorts behind it all: the banks are a cornerstone of our economic well-being, thus untouchable. Mind you, I'm not saying that philosophy is correct!
    Sconny
    23rd Apr 2014
    1:09pm
    You are dead right and to all those Muppets who voted for, and put these bastards in power ..SHAME ON YOU..Watch this space you aint seen nothin' yet. They just announced they will put the country another 10 billion in debt for 50 dodgy fighter jets. They never have given a stuff about ordinary working Australians and Seniors
    Anonymous
    23rd Apr 2014
    1:18pm
    Actually the Howard government was the most generous with lower to middle-class welfare, tax reductions, tax incentives, Super incentives, etc. if you were prepared to look, learn and take advantage of what was on offer. It was quite incredible as you could sacrifice up to $100K into Super annually and anything that went into Super was not counted as income! By doing so you could reduce your income to a level that enabled you to then apply for and get middle-class welfare, those free $800 give-aways of Rudd, etc, etc.

    And make no mistake - you did NOT have to be earning $100K to do this as it applied to joint incomes. You just adjusted both incomes to suit the rules as a family.

    The following Labor government tightened most of the tax rules without much of a murmur from the population – probably because most did bother to find out they existed I assume. But as an ordinary working person if you paid attention to the rules, the benefits were absolutely amazing.

    Labor no-doubt did the right thing eliminating them. But at the time, they were available to EVERYONE and enabled those that paid attention to build their Super balance quite quickly.

    So yes - even Liberal governments can look after ordinary workers - if you pay attention to the rules.
    minnie
    23rd Apr 2014
    3:31pm
    Harvs - what I saw under Howard was most definitely about 'rules' but not for those most needy. With the introduction of GST many many small businesses went out of business then what was once called medium business is called small business and sole traders are 'micro business'. I remember Howard giving was it $1,000 to people over a certain age, but... I know where people who had only $1 in the bank got nothing because obviously they didn't need it, people with too much money in the bank didn't get it, but boy did I see lots with good incomes get that $1,000 - what a PM eh, the poor on pensions with nothing got nothing!

    Frankly super has become such a convoluted unmanageable process, that you need to pay someone to sort it for you, so you 'get in on the rules' and under Liberal get some money. But the people who need that help most can't afford to pay the consultant, so of course don't know or understand the rules.

    I note that Abbott has given 'pension type indexation' to DFRDB (Defence Super pre early 90s) for 55 years and over so I wonder if he take the indexation from pensions will these people have it wiped as well, probably not. He's using the military in ways we've never seen and buying the votes.

    Politican pensions, after a three year term (possibly less) and MP receives a pension almost the same amount (well over $100,000) for LIFE. A local National MP said this was done over 10 years ago to auote "...reflect the arrangements shared by other employees throughout the community." I was away that day, do you know anyone once they leave a job that the job continues to pay a pension for life without the inputs from them? When I left jobs my super was either kept in that fund or I rolled over to another, I wasn't paid nearly my wage not to be there!
    Anonymous
    23rd Apr 2014
    9:49pm
    That's wonderful Harvs rube - how many people can 'sacrifice ' $100,000 in salary? Your entire post is a blatant lie and the benefits went to those with the big incomes - not the ordinary person who pays proportionately more in fees and costs for his/her superannuation than some well-heeled parasite.

    You are definitely a troll.
    Anonymous
    23rd Apr 2014
    10:53pm
    The.Grappler - re-read what I wrote just above to discover what you TOTALLY missed about the $100K.

    Then refer to the VICTIM, DENIAL, REGRET, BLAMER and FINANCIAL NAIVETY text at the top of the page - and go look in the mirror.
    Anonymous
    24th Apr 2014
    5:55pm
    minnie - paying for accountants for advice occasionally is just smart and something you have to do. I run our own SMSF and do most of the work and keep abreast of the rules, but some things as you say are just complex with Super as are some strategies and you need actuarial advice, etc.

    As I posted in another topic - there are only about 809 politicians in Australia, but there are around 2m public servants. Many public servants have as good or better Super benefits than politicians.

    If politicians get a pay rise of $1 per year – it is only $809 more.

    These same public servants are the 2nd arm of government - and they are the ones that mostly come up with the bright ideas about cutting benefits to pensions, Super, etc.

    If public servants get a pay rise of $1 per year - it is $2m more.

    These same public servants make sure they keep a low profile - and are very successful because everyone wants a bit of our politicians and rarely looks to them - but the REAL money can be saved by looking at 2m public servants benefits – NOT politicians.

    Public servants are EXTREMELY clever - they keep the focus on 2.3m pensioners and Super funds, etc, where the big numbers of people are - BUT with 2m public servants – there are huge saving there as well of course.

    But the 2nd arm of government – the public servants who find all the savings from pensioners, etc – seem to ALWAYS forget public servants could contribute significantly. Surprisingly!
    AussieTuca
    23rd Apr 2014
    12:50pm
    i think it is time to adopt Aldous Huxley "solution" (Brave New World) and start giving legal Euthanasia options (this is a "democracy" after all; in the book it was compulsory) to those aproaching 80. I, for one, do not want live much longer beyond that age...

    This would fix the problem of ageeing population. Unless of course, the problem with bad administration and bad politicians, were fixed first. Dream on...
    heyyybob
    23rd Apr 2014
    1:11pm
    Ahhhh, Aussie Tuca . Thats the nub of it ...... "I, for one, do not want live MUCH longer beyond that age..." I suspect you will be screaming and jumping up and down when 'they' knock on your front door at age 80 saying 'Hi Tuca, it's time, you're 80 today" ......... suddenly remembering you wanted to live beyond that age ;) No option mate, thanks to you and your successful promotion of Huxley's solution :(
    Patriot
    23rd Apr 2014
    1:43pm
    Good for you Heyybob,

    I personally want to live a very long time yet (with good health of course).
    Life's about quality and also quantity if the quality criteria is met.
    That'll annoy the Bastards if nothing else
    Supernan
    23rd Apr 2014
    12:56pm
    Everyone talks about people now getting employer funded super. Guess what ? A lot of people are self employed, have to pay their employees super & cant afford their own ! ! Lots of big employers now insist their tradies become self employed sub contractors just to avoid paying their super.
    minnie
    23rd Apr 2014
    3:37pm
    Spot on Supernan, the self employed or 'micro business' gets no look in at all. They just make ends meet so they don't have to go on welfare and tread water all the time. Now the manual workers who are normally needing to stop work at 60-65 are told keep going and dangling that carrot on a stick, and of course we all know the intention was never for the donkey to get the carrot.

    Makes me smile at the young early 20s MP Liberal of course, in Queensland never did a stick of work, hardly paid any taxes and pushing for the increase to 70 years old pensions. Yet he will be paid over $100,000 for life when he quits... lets hope he takes Aldous Huxley's solution but combined it with Logan's Run!
    Patriot
    23rd Apr 2014
    1:04pm
    Well said Kaye! Exactly my feelings.

    Would be good to get soma (or any???) of the "Gutless Wonders" in Canberra who, I am certain are watching this forum, to actually "Lower themselves" and get "Down in the MUD" and reasonably argue why the people who build this nation MUST - as usual - bear the brunt of their MISMANAGEMENT and DECEIT!

    I invite them to Part take!!
    moke
    23rd Apr 2014
    2:28pm
    Hey Patriot if the 'GUTLESS WONDERS' were to get down in the mud, surely we would have to pay the laundry and dry-cleaning bills and most probably replace their spoiled clothing.
    Tom Tank
    23rd Apr 2014
    1:06pm
    No one should be surprised that we are being softened up for cuts to welfare spending and next will be privatisation because that is what will happen.
    Hit us hard now and get the dirty work over with then make extravagant claims before the next election about what wonderful money managers they are.
    Support will be assured from Rupert, Gina (perhaps that could well be Dame Gina by then) and cohorts because they will be the winners in all of this and we will be the losers, again.
    BrianP
    23rd Apr 2014
    1:27pm
    Comment from Brian Parkes (Australian Voice Party)

    Our new political party is seeking support across Australia so we can push the Government to protect pensions and target superannuation tax concessions instead. At the same time we want Government to get big business to pay billions of dollars in tax that they are currently avoiding. In other words, the Government can get international companies to pay correct tax instead of slugging Seniors.

    People power is what we are about. We cannot do this without you, so please show your support by going to our website. Join us instead of the Liberal or Labor parties. http://www.australianvoice.org/
    Patriot
    23rd Apr 2014
    1:56pm
    Hi Brian,
    Good to see you weighing in!

    We indeed desperately need A (ONE or max TWO) new parties that truly represents the Aust voter & whose first preference is the interest to Aust as a whole.
    Don't take this personally, but INTEGRITY is HARD to FIND these days!!!
    Too many new parties will splinter the votes & the big parties will WIN AGAIN!
    So, what I suggest is, that all the parties that are "Springing Up" at this very moment, put some of their differences aside and amalgamate to form a POWERFUL FORCE that actually has the ability to beat major parties.

    Such should not be too difficult as - after all - when the new party is governing the PEOPLE will direct the actions of their Elected Reps.

    The main campaign/drive should be to provide Citizens initiated referendum & Voter veto to the Taxpayers.
    Education of these principles can be found in a book by the name of "The People's Law" Written by Geoffry deQ Walker who, at the time, was the Dean of St Lucia University in Brisbane.

    I believe that with many small parties, WE THE PEOPLE, will remain STUFFED as we currently are !!!!
    FrankC
    23rd Apr 2014
    2:06pm
    Don't forget the tax from the Hillsong organisation, Brian ; that will increase the coffers with big bickkies.!
    Anonymous
    24th Apr 2014
    5:00pm
    How much do you want to raise tax on super Brian .
    Do you think individuals should contribute to their own super or leave as is where companies pay .
    Patriot
    23rd Apr 2014
    1:40pm
    One of the "Shackles" that keep us tied to the major parties is the "Preferential Voting" enforced by our Electoral system!
    It makes certain that the Major Parties always get into power with massive majorities!

    The only way around this - as outlined by "Arthur Chresby" is as follows:

    1 - At the next election take a Ball Point Pen with you
    2 - Get the voting papers
    3 - Vote for "your Favourite"
    4 - PUT A LINE through the BOX & Name of any other candidate that you definitely DO
    NOT WANT in Government! With your Ball Point Pen of course!
    This may be SOME or ALL remaining candidates!
    5 - Write on the paper: "Crossed out Candidates are NOT SUITABLE".

    In order to succeed, we MUST beat the BASTARDS at their own game!
    KSS
    23rd Apr 2014
    2:04pm
    If you do not want to vote but want to avoid the fine, comply with Patriot to the letter. Your ballot paper will be classified as defaced and not counted. Way to go!
    Patriot
    23rd Apr 2014
    2:24pm
    KSS,
    According to Arthur Chresby - who was a long time in parliament, the vote as described IS VALID but bypasses the Preferrential voting System!

    Below is the link to DownLoad
    http://www.peoplesmandate.iinet.net.au/your_will_be_done.pdf
    moke
    23rd Apr 2014
    2:36pm
    Thankyou Patriot I will follow your advice next election. I get very angry when I have voted for someone I think will do a good job only to find my vote has gone some where I would not have made it. I think our system of preferentialism is underhand if it is to continue surely we should know where the vote will go if that party is not successful, and then perhaps we would change our mind.
    Anonymous
    23rd Apr 2014
    3:25pm
    I do not vote.... our Constitution makes it clear that voting for folks of a certain age is compulsory, but goes on the say that if a person fails to vote and does not give a reasonable excuse they face a fine. So you need a 'reasonable' excuse. On the other hand you can go get your name crossed off the sausage roll, and write all over the ballot paper or sneak the ballot paper out and throw it away . I give an excuse and have never been fined because the Govt recognises they cannot force a citizen to vote, it's just compulsory to keep the rotten system afloat and politicians in the money.
    Anonymous
    23rd Apr 2014
    3:29pm
    An informal vote is a ballot paper which has been incorrectly completed or not filled in at all. Informal votes are not counted towards any candidate but are set aside.

    According to s. 268 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act (1918), a vote is informal if:

    The ballot paper is not marked at all.
    The ballot paper does not have the official mark and has not been initialled by the polling official and the ballot paper is not authentic in the opinion of the Divisional Returning Officer (DRO).
    The ballot paper has writing on it which identifies the voter.
    In the case of an absent vote the ballot paper is not contained in the declaration envelope.
    The voter has not marked a vote correctly for it to be considered acceptable.
    minnie
    23rd Apr 2014
    3:44pm
    I think a better way is for people to learn how to do their own preferences. If you fill out the lower house 1to whatever correctly, with who you choose first and second who you want etc.

    Then for the senate sit down and put a NUMBER IN EVERY SQUARE. They do your preferences because you've become too lazy to do them.

    There are websites at election times that you can do it online look up all the parties and number your preferences, then you print it out and use that on election day to make it easy.

    REMEMBER it's you that give them your preferences.
    minnie
    23rd Apr 2014
    3:47pm
    PIXAPD so you don't vote, and seem proud of the fact and enjoy to take from the system that you don't even care enough about to vote. I say to people who don't vote by choice, I'm not interested in any of your opinion on politics, policies or how things effect you because you don't care enough to vote! Shame on you!!
    Anonymous
    23rd Apr 2014
    4:12pm
    OH no, shame on me,,,,for thinking, lol, hee, hee.....shame on me for making my own decisions....lol, hee, hee....shame on me for not being led around by the nose...lol, hee, hee....shame on me for having some success as a pensioner...lol...hee, hee. OH YEAH...shame on me. Oh and as I understand it voting is not a prerequisite for receiving the pension.
    Patriot
    23rd Apr 2014
    4:31pm
    Minnie,

    If somebody served Sunday Desert with three selections.
    The problem is that each of these three options is laced with a deadly - though different - poison.
    Would you select any of these deserts of would you just pass?

    In my opinion, this analogy applies to our political system as it currently stands!
    May be not supporting is their enslaving system is an option we have.
    Anonymous
    23rd Apr 2014
    9:57pm
    ........|¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨ |…‡
    ........|>>TROLL ALERT<.|||"|""\__...? ....? ? ..TRO-O-O-O-LL..? …?
    .... ...|__________________|||_|_|)<
    ???!(@)'(@)""""**!(@) (@)*!(@)
    AlbertC
    23rd Apr 2014
    2:21pm
    here we go again all along the way no more for pensioners why libs take more pay . money they don,t need, as i said lets have the referendum royal commission via our new governor general who should have the power to intervene on money perks all polies get it is about time this country woke from its slumber and started bringing them in line with the rest of us to many people from both sides of politics go in empty handed and come out filthy rich after 12 yrs it takes most working ausies 40 years or more to get a slight advantage to see them through till death does them part. the polies come out miles ahead and can still keep their suppa while working for the government such as an overseas posting and accumulate extra supper . wake wake wake up have a nice day
    minnie
    23rd Apr 2014
    3:48pm
    BLOCK SUPPLY BEFORE JULY - double dissolution required before it's too late to save the country.
    Old Fella
    23rd Apr 2014
    2:25pm
    Successive parliaments have ensured the needs of their parliamentarians , wouldn't it be a real coup if a parliament was elected that not only addresses but meets the needs of the electorate , community and country (Australia). It is disheartening and distressing that every new parliament claims a need to expose and repair the previous parliaments actions. As though saying idiots follow idiots and precipitate idiots yet to come to idolatrize and serve their personal ends.
    Obviously what is floored is the education we are providing the country and our children to produce only idiots to manage and serve the country. Perhaps something like leadership and respect for fellow Australian citizen needs; needs to be reframed so as to actualise a better purpose of Government rather than elevating and enriching the few at the cost of the many?
    musicveg
    23rd Apr 2014
    2:32pm
    I am not sure who to feel sorry for more,the teenagers who won't be able to get into the workforce because the oldies will still be working or the oldies who are not fit or healthy enough to keep working. Whichever way you look there won't be any savings by increasing the retirement age,they will either pay it out to unemployed young people or disability pension. I think if people want to keep working they should be able to but it is not right for everyone. Especially those who work in physically demanding jobs,it is cruel.
    raymondp
    23rd Apr 2014
    4:31pm
    I wonder if the Liberals will take a pay cut, that would help the bottom line no end?
    Anonymous
    28th Apr 2014
    8:15am
    Yes, Get Krudd to give his pay back. He stuffed Australia and killed people. (Pink Batts & Boat people) What a weed.

    23rd Apr 2014
    7:07pm
    What pension cuts would they be...must be the invisible unseen kind, for as yet NOTHING has been done.....the scare mongers are having a field day with their assumptions.
    jimmy
    23rd Apr 2014
    9:45pm
    current superannuation scheme has been devised to provide financial institutions with huge profits.
    much better if the government operates a compulsory superannuation scheme then fees would be reduced (no shareholders to pay) and everyone would get a non means tested pension. Would also stop pensioners when they retire from getting a lump sum payment spending it then expecting the government to look after them.
    Jilly B
    23rd Apr 2014
    9:51pm
    The age Pension should be looked at in the context of what is happening in the world. it is simply crazy to ask people who have worked since 16 or earlier to work until 70. Age Discrimination is already huge and hundreds of thousands of people are out of work. We will not go to the argument about the few %wise who could work. It must be indexed whilst fixed costs continue to rise. It is very worrying for those for are planning to retire in the next 5 years or less.
    Young Simmo
    23rd Apr 2014
    11:39pm
    For my money people who spent their working life at a desk should work till they turn 80. People who spent their lives as Plumbers and Bricklayers should work till 55. Fairly simple really, why are our dumb Pollies too stupid to work it out.
    Young Simmo
    24th Apr 2014
    12:19am
    In addition to that little rant, who thinks it is a good idea for a 68 year old person to take a job away from a 28 year old person. Come on, either you agree or don't.
    Young Simmo
    24th Apr 2014
    12:21am
    Another thing about this shambles, is how the hell is Joe Hockey going to enjoy retirement under these new conditions?
    Young Simmo
    24th Apr 2014
    12:25am
    Arr good, I have found my own little paddock, it helps with all you Eastern Staters going to bed early.
    It just occurred to me that it won't be a problem for good old Joe, if he doesn't reduce his girth.
    Jilly B
    24th Apr 2014
    12:31am
    I am pleased you have signed your rely Young Simmo because perhaps in 45years time you may have experienced a bit more of life and perhaps all these will not have been wonderful. When young there is nothing wrong with enthusiasm but life has a curious way of leveling expectations and unexpected things happen that change life. If you escape these experiences then good luck but please do not slander all without any evidence of effort.
    Young Simmo
    24th Apr 2014
    12:39am
    Jilly B, I am just a dumb old 74 year old, so if you could put your comment into say, Kindergarten language so I can comprehend it, I will do you the honour of a reply.
    Also, if I am still here in 45 years time, I don't want a pension, I want a medal.
    Jilly B
    24th Apr 2014
    2:02am
    Young Simmo, Thanks for clarifying your age. Being deceptive and generalizing is not contribute to a discussion. I am sure you have worked hard all your life like my family have. I think you have to walk a mile in anybody's shoes to really understand how they spend their day. Most of this discussion is kite flying to see the reaction. Every person has a different set of circumstances and some could have improved there situation and some not.
    Anonymous
    24th Apr 2014
    10:56am
    Jilly B - Young Simmo has done what many won't - adapted his lifestyle to his income. He has downsized and is comfortable and now has some money to spare.

    Most just want to keep doing the same and keep WISHING their income would increase to fit their lifestyle. If you have a house that you own and it is worth a reasonable amount - you have MANY options to do something about increasing your weekly cash availability. If you rent and have no other assets or money then that makes it harder if you are now retired. I suggest Young Simmo found his answer to a similar dilemma.

    But you need to understand this - NEARLY ANYONE (except The.Grappler) can learn how to retire with nearly $500K without almost thinking. Start at age 20 with $1000, put in $50 per week - repeat constantly and without fail for 45 years - and you will have around $500K assuming 5% interest per annum average.

    AND $50/week is SIMPLE to do - just SACRIFICE some level of consumerism like smokes, grog, latte's, junk foods, making sangers instead of buying lunch, going out to dinner as often, going out to a show as often, don’t send kids to private schools, drive a 2nd hand car, live in a less consumer junk cluttered house, don’t waste money on doing ‘stuff’ to your house, buy less clothes, buy less of ANYTHING that you don't just WANT. Some simple adjustments can make a huge difference. What it means to PAY YOURSELF FIRST – is what most people fail to understand. By not understanding the rules of PAY YOURSELF FIRST they wonder what happened to all their money when they are 65 years or older.

    You can remain in control and are never a victim and refuse to be cornered if you think similarly to Young Simmo.

    Most people on this forum want the world to adapt to their circumstances – it ain’t gunna happen! People don’t plan to fail – they just FAIL TO PLAN!
    heyyybob
    24th Apr 2014
    11:00am
    I think you are seriously misjudging the audience (this forum) you are preaching to, Harvs. I suspect a lot have had, through NO fault of theirs, shite happen to them during their lives. Less patronising and more understand for your next sermon please ;) Unlike you and I, a lot of folk here are less than perfect :)
    Anonymous
    24th Apr 2014
    11:41am
    Heyyybob – taking a defensive position and indicating I consider myself perfect does not progress any learning. I realise a few would have had no opportunity.

    I also will be pressing some very tender buttons with many here because they KNOW they have squandered the opportunities they did have. Blaming is simple to do – planning and executing a plan to fix the problem is hard and therefore generally avoided.

    What I see here generally - except for the likes of PIXAPD and Young Simmo (and a couple of others), are VICTIMS of their own self-making.

    PIXAPD and Young Simmo REFUSE to be victims - even though they seem to own MUCH LESS than most people on this forum - and just happen to be the HAPPIEST.

    They are able to adapt to changing circumstances and then fit their lifestyle to their income. They don't whine about governments not doing enough for them - they go out and find solutions to their problems.

    How many here who have houses have thought about selling and living in a cheaper house in the country-side, or an outer suburb, or even say Malaysia so they have enough money to be comfortable like PIXAPD and Young Simmo? Very few is my guess – and why should you – the government should give you more is the most likely answer to the problem.

    If you are retired and on a pension and for whatever reason now don’t have the necessary resources to be comfortable – you either learn from the likes of PIXAPD and Young Simmo – or remain a VICTIM and BLAME everyone else for your dilemma – and fail to plan to improve your situation.

    If you wanted to improve this forum and your own situations instead of blaming the world for your financial woes, you should pool ideas and look for solutions that other people such as PIXAPD and Young Simmo have found.

    Something is working – because they are the happiest.
    heyyybob
    24th Apr 2014
    12:09pm
    Oh dear ! Still not getting it ? Judging who is happiest and who hasn't done this or that, according to ones (hinted at expert) opinion and the final ironic twist is taking oneself so seriously and not even seeing someones tongue in their cheeks when they claim to be perfect is a clue ;)
    Anonymous
    24th Apr 2014
    4:50pm
    Nope - never an expert - been teaching myself about and investing for 40 years since I was 20, to ensure I could at least be reasonably competent and confident - hope to spend another 40 learning very much more.

    24th Apr 2014
    5:49am
    Well Well Well, The chickens have come home to roost. This budget would be a lot more palatable if Krudd/Gillard had not gone on an idiotic spending spree squandering billions. Even up here in Queensland, Bligh left us 80 billion in debt and has stuffed our credit rating. Thankyou to the labor flotsam and jetson. You know, everything has to eventually pay its way. While Porky makes it sound worse than it is, it is still a disaster. So tighten your belts and stop moaning. Count your blessings. Get off your bum and move.

    24th Apr 2014
    10:54am
    WHAT PENSION CUTS would they be...must be the invisible unseen kind, for as yet NOTHING has been done.....the scare mongers are having a field day with their assumptions. You poor people,,,,,you read something in the press then ADD to it to make your crappy assumptions
    Radish
    24th Apr 2014
    5:35pm
    I also am scratching my head. Nothing has been said as to what changes are to be made so why not sit back, take a deep breathe and wait and see then make comment. The media make all these wild accusations and people are gullible enough to take them on board.
    Radish
    24th Apr 2014
    5:43pm
    I would also like to add that the pension is "not a right". It is a safety net. The right to a pension for everyone in this country went out years and years ago.
    Anonymous
    26th Apr 2014
    12:49pm
    I agree with you both. We are very well off in this wonderful country. Close down the tax payer funded ABC and there would be enough to give pensioners a pay increase. Anyway you get what you pay for in this world and that is how it should be.
    Wstaton
    28th Apr 2014
    1:12pm
    A couple of things. Lets compare the ABC costs (1.2b I think) to the PPL est 5.5b At leats the ABC tries to keep everyone honest.

    You should also look at some facts comparing the cost of the ABC to commercial where the hidden costs are added to everything we consume.

    https://www.fabcnsw.org.au/fabc/about_abc.html
    MITZY
    24th Apr 2014
    10:55am
    Kaye : Agree with most of your comment. Like the idea re 1% social security fee being applied to the 1.7 TRILLION superannuation moneys held by our financial institutions whose fees are the third highest in the developed world. $17 BILLION p.a. received from this, paid into a Future Fund would be ideal.
    It's also about time the contribution rate reached its intended 15%. Politicians' current contributions amount to 15.2% whereas the general taxpayers rate which started around 3% in the Keating era is currently suspended on 9.25%.
    If we are so poorly off as a country, financially, (which I do not believe) why spend trillions on fighter planes and millions on a PPL and providing a smokescreen about who is paying for the PPL. Companies certainly aren't, as they will have their company tax reduced by 2% in order to pay the 2% PPL levy. Not that companies pay much tax once they deduct and deduct and deduct but another 2% deducted from their tax payments doesn't make sense if we are so poor. Not convinced taking all those company high flyers to Japan Korea and China was really necessary they are surely rich enough to pay their own way and make their own decisions about whom they trade with. Too much waste of taxpayers' hard-earned funds.
    Anonymous
    24th Apr 2014
    4:56pm
    PPL is a bipartisan policy . Or Quad partisan policy . It is only a matter of which scheme you prefer .
    If Society think it is good social policy to pay a mum to stay with her new born it is only arguing over how long and how much .
    Libs think it should be for six months on full salary of up to 75,000
    Greens think it should be for six months up to a salary of 50,000
    Unions think it should be for six months up to a salary of 35,000
    All the above think it should be a work right .
    Labor think it should be for 16 weeks and a reduced salary to the minimum wage
    But as welfare not a right .
    Young Simmo
    24th Apr 2014
    5:38pm
    OK, lets be honest about the modern cry-babies that can't even wipe their noses. We never got any payed parental leave, any Baby Bonus, any first house buyers free gift from the rest of the country. We did it the hard way and the modern SOOKS wouldn't last 5 minutes if they came up our way. In fact a good old fashioned word " GUTS " comes to mind. It the younger ones are smart they will shut and stay out of site.
    OK, I am ready.
    Anonymous
    24th Apr 2014
    6:59pm
    Young Simmo – you would have been about 60 in 2000 when the first iteration of maternity payments appeared – probably a bit late.

    However, family leave has been around since 1979 – so you were about 39 – maybe not too young to have taken advantage – had you the partner and the need.

    BUT – the federal government began giving out cash grants to first home buyers in 1964 – you would have only been about 20 and very likely would have qualified!
    Young Simmo
    24th Apr 2014
    7:13pm
    Hello Harvs, we missed out by a hair. Got married in July 1960 and bought first State House in Karrinyup WA, early 1962 when I was 22. Oh well, you win some and you loose some.
    Also had my last fag at 8.30 am 10th June 2000, YeeeHaaaaaa.
    Anonymous
    25th Apr 2014
    3:39pm
    Best you bought my first house for cash at 22 with three kids from housing trust in SA at Elizabeth . No handouts . From memory it cost 3 500 pounds
    RobJohn
    24th Apr 2014
    5:28pm
    One Term Tony..Should be the cry of all Australian Pensioners..We are great in numbers and our voice can be heard at the stroke of a pen at the next Federal election.
    Anonymous
    24th Apr 2014
    8:18pm
    I think you spoke loudly enough at the last election .
    Anonymous
    25th Apr 2014
    1:18pm
    Australians are a conservative bunch we don't change govt lightly and Normaly elect govt for a long stretch . The last lot were an aberration . I expect the coaltion to be in for a long time .
    Plenty of time for labor to come up with new policies .
    Radish
    24th Apr 2014
    5:33pm
    In my view Mr Hockey would not be so stupid to make these changes if they were "not necessary." Why would anyone do that who hoped to keep his seat at the next election. I believe this country does need to live within its means and we cannot go on living on borrowed money leaving a huge bill to be paid by those coming behind us. I fully expect to be slugged one way or another (he said all would be hit by changes) and I will take it on the chin. There is no other option and I am sure if Labor had retained power they would be doing something similar.
    Young Simmo
    24th Apr 2014
    5:44pm
    Can anybody come up with a total and exact figure for what the New Payed Parental Leave, Baby Bonus and First Home buyers Bonus is going to be. Just one number of dollars for the whole lot will do.
    Anonymous
    24th Apr 2014
    8:23pm
    Nope but I can tell you what it should be 30,000 a year . Paid through the tax dept . No matter what you earn we make it up to 30,000 .
    Only one welfare payment .
    No family tax no other welfare payments .
    No social security dept.
    No fed education dept
    No fed health dept .
    The conservatives rule.
    Young Simmo
    24th Apr 2014
    8:49pm
    Yeh pete, since 1960 we have bought 3 houses and had 3 kids. Do you know where I go to get a BACK-PAY application form.
    CindyLou
    24th Apr 2014
    8:57pm
    So many comments in such a short time. I agree with Radish, dont think there are other options...
    On a personal level I certainly don't wish to be critical of individuals, and whilst some folk have had circumstances that preclude improving their situation over time, I respectfully feel many folk have failed to improve their financial situation, lazy, lacking motivation or whatever.
    Myself, could get a job in my early 40s in my previous field, did a short course, worked very hard using this qualification whilst then pursuing further education to get an even better job. Was hard, studying, kids at school, doing assignments till 3 - 4am, so tired sometimes washed my hair and worked on assignments with cold wet hair so as to stay awake...then got 3 hours sleep, up at 7am, off to work...I did all this because I knew I had to improve myself financially.
    Again, I dont want to slam others but I think this country needs some tough decisions to be
    made....
    CindyLou
    24th Apr 2014
    9:01pm
    Additional !!
    Just read my post, correction could NOT get a job in my previous field (office work)
    Young Simmo
    24th Apr 2014
    11:44pm
    AARrrr, all you Eastern Staters have gone to sleep, Oh well, it looks like I will have to wait till tomorrow to get all your accolades. It doesn't really matter as long as you all are confirming, I am always right.
    Humble Young Simmo.
    CindyLou
    25th Apr 2014
    1:04am
    Not all Eastern Staters are asleep, I guarantee you that I am so wide awake...a consequence of previously working night shifts, studying into the wee small hours etc.
    Young Simmo
    25th Apr 2014
    1:33am
    Point Taken CindyLou, I am back on the job because I went from half, to one Oxy Contin to give myself a little treat. Some people would freak out, but at my age I will kark it in the next 10 minutes to 10 years, so who cares.
    Have a nice night Dear.
    CindyLou
    25th Apr 2014
    1:12am
    Additionally, Young Simmo, love your posts, but can I add one thought for you to ponder...
    Humility
    Young Simmo
    25th Apr 2014
    1:01pm
    Well it's 11 am in the West and no action in here. Everybody must have gone to the ANZAC march and then off to the pub. Oh well, I will just have to keep exercising my fingers on the key board and my brain in the Solitaire to keep the dementia away. That's my story and I am sticking to it.

    25th Apr 2014
    2:25pm
    I was wondering, if the pensioners are going to get slaughtered according to the scare mongerers, are the pollies still going ahead with their out of this world pay increases. I have just tightened my belt in anticipation of starving to death. When is the sky going to fall in. Good To see Young Simmo alive and well. We both came through the old school with not many hand outs.

    25th Apr 2014
    2:32pm
    Hey Kaye, Some of your comments are very good, but when is Swan, Rudd, Gillard, Bligh & Co going to take responsibility for the incompetent running of this country and the unbelievable blow out in debt and squandering of our hard earned tax money, which is a direct cause of the blow out inherited by the Lib/Nats. That is why we will have a horror budget. Why won't they support the abolition of the carbon tax, causing our power bills to skyrocket. They don't care. that is why. Hypocrates.
    Radish
    27th Apr 2014
    7:57am
    totally agree with you Dogs Body. Gillard and Rudd sail off into the sunset like all previous PMs with the nice superannuation and lurks and perks for rest of their lives with nary a thought back at the havoc they have caused.
    Kopernicus
    25th Apr 2014
    5:37pm
    Well Harvs, my turn to diagnose you. I'd say you've got a chronic dose of the black or white syndrome. One is either a doer, get's it done successfully and problem solved or one becomes a can't be bothered slacker, doomed to morph into a whinger. Your empathy for the latter is a big fat zero. The world is more than 50 shades of grey, for me.

    Heard of a bell curve? 50% earn at or below average income. Those with growing families and a mortgage or rent and earning a modest amount have buckley's salting any money, let a lot of money into super or investment (like the $100k you glibly mentioned elsewhere). That was me and it wasn't till the kids left that I could start to max my super.

    I came across some interesting data associated with the Gonsky reform. Want to predict if a 5 year old will go to Uni? Put in the postcode - bingo! Kids from high socio economic burbs will outdo kids in the low ones - by a huge margin. Are those 'Westies' in Sydney just born dumb, or lazy? Doubt it, don't you. It's your socioeconomic milieu that provides the level of schooling, expectation, mentoring etc. Sure, many will break out and defy expectation, but most won't - it's in the stats. So do you blame these young people and call them failures or do you come to understand that it was harder for them in many ways compared to the other side of the tracks. Gonsky goal will of course be to ameliorate the difference (not supported by those adults in charge most of whom went to the best schools).
    Self funded super - will terrify many, fearing their decision making competency(I don't have one either, would have hated to hang off the ASX numbers daily). Does that disqualify one from noting that your managed fund is ripping you off. Not in my book.

    Money's not everything and I too admire people who get by happily on little. There are also personal attributes like emotional intelligence, ethics of social fairness rather than dog eats dog, generosity and contribution to society.

    I think you've been rather harsh to people who are not like you. I also do not regard not taking a back step as a virtue. It simply means you choose not to think about or consider the other person - you like to be always right. That's why you were described as arrogant.
    Anonymous
    25th Apr 2014
    8:32pm
    Kopernicus – you have missed in your analysis by several country kilometers! So I will take a different tack than I was going to.

    My family was blue collar and for a bunch of reasons we had very limited money to throw around when I was growing up. I went to state schools, left high school in year 10 at the age of 16 and I worked in a metal trade for the first 18 years of my life. I understand your bell curve extremely well and was on the wrong side of it for years.

    Therefore I am seriously NOT interested in your or anyone else’s opinion that I can’t empathise. Empathise where you might have come from – I SURE CAN – what people are often seeking here is SYMPATHY. It is never going come from me if you have had your health, your mind and any sort of earning power.

    During those 18 years I spent many hours learning about investing and the world generally, saw I was going to go no-where if I stayed on the path I was and got myself into and through uni in my mid to late 30’s. As I had to resign from my work to go to uni full time, I got paid my Super – which I would like to add was NOT FREE at the time – but something I had to ELECTED INTO – and did so at 17 and had FULLY PAID for it every fortnight. This investment foresight ensured I would have no mortgage debt as I went through uni (but no Super)!! Also See CindyLou’s comments about how she refused to accept what she was being offered above in these posts – that is pretty indicative of what you have to do if you want to change your circumstances later in life.

    I decided in my late 30’s that I would retire at 55. I had NO Super at that time and no assets other than my house that I had paid off. I did retire at 55. In the mean time I had 2 kids, they both went through state schools and then to uni, I salary sacrificed into Super, my wife worked, my kids worked and bought their OWN cars, etc, we rigidly adhered to our retire-at-55 savings target and eventually met our goals. We DELAYED a huge amount of consumer spending and lifestyle to ensure we could meet our goals. Going to uni eventually ensured I got paid more, but that took some time.

    I have never had any formal financial training – but now know a huge amount compared to what I used to – but at the same time realise that I know very little and have so much more to learn. That dubious circle of friends of mine shares a common interest in learning about all sorts of financial and political things. That way we increase and broaden our knowledge about finance and government daily. We are always looking ahead to see what might affect us and how we might mitigate any risks, etc. We all keep learning and adapting to change – regardless of our age.

    So - don’t EVER tell me I can’t empathise – and do NOT expect me to sympathise. God helps those that help themselves (is that not right PIXAPD? – I am not an authority). Do I always want to be right? Damn straight I do! Am I? Of course not. That is why one goes onto sites like this one – to learn.
    Anonymous
    25th Apr 2014
    8:49pm
    Kopernicus - I am not going to be drawn on your $100K comment past this FINAL attempt to make it clearer – you really have to be interested in tax rules and how they can work for you. $100K was only the upper limit - and those of us not being paid that amount still managed to use a part of the $100K benefit to our advantage.

    It was just a game of reducing the total amount of FAMILY income you were deemed to have been paid so you could get the other family benefits they were offering - for years. People can either take the time to learn about this stuff or bury their heads – but Howard was offering money to most of us. OK the rich got more – you can’t do anything about that except vote them out – but in the meantime you either learn to do what the rich do – or miss out completely - and make-believe later it was only for the rich as several have stated here.

    But ordinary people like me will shake our heads at these comments and likely get fairly short tempered when we hear people tell us what they THINK was happening – when at least some of us were there actually doing it.
    Anonymous
    26th Apr 2014
    10:03am
    Kopernicus – I assume you might read this as articles on this site decay quickly and I might be the only one remaining poster.

    As you are likely a teacher you have had heaps of opportunity to save for your retirement – probably even more so if you were always in a government system – IF you had elected into their politician-like Super when you were young. Regardless you know what opportunities you had and possibly did not take up and that is water under the bridge.

    Your comment about SMSF is interesting. You definitely know how to learn – so it is only fear of the unknown. It is actually NOT that hard – it is the industry that tries to pretend it is so people keep their money with them. Their aim is to move as much of your money into their pockets over a period of time so it does not appear to be outright theft. If you have a government scheme, that makes it easier possibly if it is being managed well or is a defined benefit which means it can’t lose money regardless of a market crash – because the government (tax payer) backs it up.

    Managing your own Super is basically as simple as remembering a few basic rules – don’t contribute too much over 12 months, all assets are to be at arms-length, that is, you can’t buy stuff that belongs to yourself or live in or use assets and make sure whatever you buy is in the name of your fund. There are heaps more, but if you watch a few basics your accountant helps with the complexities. It costs about $3K annually to run which is heaps cheaper than most industry and especially financial insto type funds and you need about $200K as a minimum probably to bother. The money side is just having an interest and learning some basics about finance. Let me tell you straight – most of the people managing your money are not much smarter that you – if they were so smart they would be off doing their own thing and making money on their own. There are heaps of different products out there on the ASX that don’t

    Even if you don’t want to run your own SMSF, you NEED to take an interest in where the people managing your money are actually putting it. If you are retired, it is still very likely they have your money tied up in a high level of shares in many outsourced Super funds. So at what point do you give them a call and tell them to move it into cash because this market has been going up for 5 years and MIGHT be ready to not go up, but down? These people will tell you it is TIME in the market not TIMING the market. That is because they get more commission money from their handlers when you are in managed funds and not in cash. It is up to individual’s to take responsibility and learn at any age about their own finances. Because NO-ONE ELSE will I can assure you – especially governments.

    I am pretty sure I can’t offend very many on this site – they are pretty focussed on repeating many years of government taught financial entitlement behaviour (vote buying) and are unlikely to even read what I would write, let alone try and change – and anyway, it requires hard work and constant effort. There is no doubt that it is much easier to abdicate responsibility and, I am very sorry to say, to blame others and be a victim. But I will admit to attempting to shake them out of their entitlement apathies.

    However, I have learnt heaps in a very short time about how a section of the population thinks about retirement - and their attitudes about why they are where they are. I am a strong advocate for removing entitlements as there are heaps of rent seekers like pharmacists, miners, politicians, PUBLIC SERVANTS, etc – but these same rent seekers are rampant with lobbyists – so it will be interesting to see what really happens, if anything. This government like the last one, is not very bright. A pox be on all their houses.

    I and am now going to disappear as you are right, I will come across as arrogant – but it is actually just a high level of general confidence and control over my life. I have got that from years of hard work and constant self-education and a refusal to ever be cornered or at the mercy of something like a government. As I teach my own kids, the harder you work at getting good at something – the luckier you get. Have a good retirement. Cheers.
    Bling Bling
    25th Apr 2014
    6:01pm
    Perhaps just perhaps had Labor not WASTED the money we might not have had to resort to this drastic action .... Bling Bling
    Anonymous
    26th Apr 2014
    12:44pm
    That's right Bling Bling, People should stick to the facts and not get bogged down in other trivial issues. Not here to read antibiographys. Love your dog.
    Radish
    26th Apr 2014
    4:34pm
    you are right Bling Bling. No politician in their right mind would be making changes which are going to upset a great many people just for the fun of it. If the changes are not made now maybe there will NOT be a pension for a great many at all further down the road. I dont think whatever changes are made will be as bad as expected and this is usually the case no matter which government is in power. It is called softening us up. As CindyLou has said it is probably time for a great many coming up for retirement to have a rethink and "plan" for themselves and not rely entirely on government to fund their retirement.
    CindyLou
    26th Apr 2014
    9:13am
    I've been thinking about these posts and the subtle way news is leaked.
    I don't think it's accidental and forums, news etc all contribute to desensitize us so thy hen the changes occur we are more accepting as its not a surprise. It's a pretty smart tactic, makes me think of the 'frog in boiling water metaphor'.
    Unfortunately I think this metaphor also applies to many folk who don't think or plan ahead. Again I don't wish to slam anyone, but I think it's unrealistic to expect everything to be ok later in life if you haven't planned or thought about the future, making adjustments where needed.
    Bit like an athlete, who needs to train before they can compete, they just can't put on runners, go to the gym a week or so before an events and expect to excel.
    CindyLou
    26th Apr 2014
    9:26am
    PS. I've done the hard yards myself, previous jobs include;
    Shop assistant, usherette, cleaner, supermarket shelf packer, pizza delivery, assistant nurse (ain) etc., census collector, car park attendant...etc
    Clearly I thought about my future, made adjustments and worked very hard to get somewhere in life...started with a basic 4th form eduction but was hungry for a better life.
    In an ideal world the pension would be better but as others have demonstrated, such as our lovely Young Simmo, people need to adjust and yes, life is not fair or equal but it is what is.
    Radish
    27th Apr 2014
    3:09pm
    20 years ago I heeded the warning that people needed to prepare for their retirement. Very glad I did.
    speakup
    27th Apr 2014
    3:57am
    Perhaps a start should be mad with the Queensland Premier refusing his $70,000 a year wage rise ,as i cannot afford to refuse my $7 a week Pension increase
    speakup
    27th Apr 2014
    4:07am
    Just scrap the State Governments and all the Public servants that go with them. A population of 24 million does not need 13 Governments at the expense of its citizens.The Nations debt would very quickly diminish,and we would all benefit
    Anonymous
    28th Apr 2014
    8:00am
    Spot on speakup. We just have far to many chiefs and not enough Indians in all walks of life in Australia. Get rid of the dead wood. As taxpayers feathering the nests of these unproductive leaches through our ridiculous system of governments it is high time with our meagre population we just had one governing body. This country is a joke and we are being conned all this dead wood is necessary. No other country would put up with it.
    Blossom
    30th Apr 2014
    12:15am
    My now late father was saying at least 40 years ago that there was too many chiefs and not enough Indians. He was drawing up plans for metal fittings he welded onto heavy vehicles. Drawings the qualified Draftsmen did didn't work. He learnt welding to make house gates, not to do welding at work (welders earnt more) he welded the parts onto the vehicles because he was asked to - he never got welder's salary..... or draftman's......... they got a fortune compared to qualified motor mechanics.
    COWBOY
    27th Apr 2014
    10:03am
    well its quiet clear the governnment is looking for the exit door, you may as well throw the keys to bill shorton now cause you lot are on your way, can anyone tell me if the butget has affected the pollies in any way , i should think not.
    Radish
    27th Apr 2014
    3:07pm
    I watched the Bolt report this morning and both Costello and Kosta (ex Labor Treasurer in NSW) were spot on. The libs are doing the right thing in trying to rein in debt. It is all hot air from Labor and as Kosta said they are just opposing which is what Oppositions do.
    Do we want to end up like Greece; I sure dont. Debt has to be got under control.
    Anonymous
    28th Apr 2014
    8:07am
    Well Cowboy, It is solely because of the inability of the past labor government to handle money we are in this bloody mess. They had record earnings during their time, but squandered the lot plus hundreds of billions. As for that puppet Shorten, he will never be a PM. Completely unsuitable in every way. Good on the Lib/Nats for trying to fix this countries woes.

    28th Apr 2014
    12:38pm
    By this time next year I will most likely be getting $1000 a fortnight as pension.
    Blossom
    30th Apr 2014
    12:18am
    Centrelink or Veterans Affairs???----they get more than Centrelink do
    Young Simmo
    30th Apr 2014
    12:32am
    PIXAPD, me and the Mrs are scraping by on the $2000 a fortnight we get from Centerlink, but another couple of hundred would give us 3 trips overseas instead of the lousy 2 we currently get. Life wasn't meant to be easy.
    Wstaton
    28th Apr 2014
    12:55pm
    Wow! If the government had taken over the management of superanuation and then collected the fees for managing it ($18.5b) and then invested the super in things like infrastructure instead of the banks etc getting it then lending to sourced out companies at interest which then added to the government costs we would be in gravy street.

    But no1 like everything else sold off forgoing the profits that would have been substantial now. Soon there will be nothning to sell off. What then?
    AlbertC
    28th Apr 2014
    2:11pm
    haves like you i down sized to a lifestyle village now i find i am no better off all this crap about how better off i would be by not paying rates what lot of crap the rent i pay for the land over 12 months well and truly overtakes what i would have paid in rates and the meager amount they give you in rent assistance is a joke . have nice day
    bookwyrm
    29th Apr 2014
    12:06am
    I read an article in a major newspaper in the last two weeks which said that health professionals did not want to put money into keeping aged citizens alive in extremely ill situations as it was not worth the cost!!!!! Also I get a community service and the supervisor dropped by today and she mostly verbally bashed those on welfare! I didn't show it but it was very depressing. Even though I am entitled to this service I am thinking of dropping it as I felt personally offended because I am on the DSP pension and she made some personal derogatory remarks about it, all the while keeping a smiling face. What has this country come to.
    S
    Young Simmo
    29th Apr 2014
    12:25am
    Yes bookwyrm, the modern younger ones have tiny little brains, and think because the average life span has gone from 63 to 82 they will never grow old. When you think about it, the average life size has grown, and the average brain size has shrunk, we are the lucky ones.
    Radish
    29th Apr 2014
    10:03am
    Have heard it said in my company (by a young person) that they did not think pensioners were that hardly done by when they often see programs on TV about the Grey Nomads driving north for the winter in their large four wheel drives towing caravans and some in Winnebagoes worth over $250K. Hard to argue with this person. See it myself. Of course not every pensioner can do this but maybe these are the ones Abbott should be having a good hard look at. Those fortunate enough to do this must have very large assets as well as getting a small pension.
    Young Simmo
    29th Apr 2014
    10:47am
    Punish the successful people, congratulations Radish, that is a brilliant idea. What you said backs up what I said about brain size above.
    bookwyrm
    29th Apr 2014
    1:26pm
    I am not married, have no children, don‘t drink except one glass at special occasions, don‘t own a car, don‘t have assets or super, and was extremely lucky to get into public housing just over two years ago.

    Did over 8 years of volunteer work, 3 to 4 half days a week but then my health got too bad. I am 8 years out from having a cancer where only a quarter to a third survive. Recently had precancerous condition preventative surgery. Am crippled with arthritis and a bad back and hips restricting my mobility. I have other serious health problems as well.

    This woman went on about how I was better off than my support worker who helps me clean! I said, when I worked I was also low income. She was catty about whether I should be on the DSP, how lucky I was to have public housing, all said with a smiling face. My friend said it was bullying and I should report her but that would stres7 me. I am just going to write all interactions from now on including the original one just in case it happens again.
    Wstaton
    29th Apr 2014
    3:31pm
    I Guess this Supervisor is being well paid by the government(taxpayers) and has a very over the top super when she retires (also paid by the taxpayer) In contrast she/he appears to say that the same government (taxpayer) is paying a pittance to the helper provided to you bookwyrm. If the government is also paying the helper super this will also be a pittance as it is a percentage of the wages and certainly will not be able to live on any eventual super. This will probably mean the helper would have to be helped with a part pension at least.

    I think this superviser should have a very serious look within her/himself.
    Radish
    29th Apr 2014
    11:32am
    Successful people, such as I mentioned in my last post, should be getting a pension entitlement? Is that what you are saying Simmo?? I was under the impression the pension was a "safety net" for those who cannot afford to look after themselves in retirement. I believe the assets test is too generous. I wont comment on the size of your brain as it would be rude.
    Young Simmo
    29th Apr 2014
    11:55am
    Now I get it, you are saying even though every single tax payer contributes to the pension, only a select few should get it.
    Blossom
    30th Apr 2014
    12:43am
    Radish. re your comment up higher on the page. Have you stopped to think that of the Gray Nomads may have sold their homes, older vehicles etc. to buy their Mobile Home/ or newer vehicle and caravan etc?? Some do some work as they travel around, to save to move on afterwards, sometimes to another job. They do it while they are healthy and young enough to enjoy themselves. Some may have never had holidays in the past.
    Young Simmo
    30th Apr 2014
    12:49am
    Yes Engy, there are a Million Nomads with a million different stories, but some people still like to paint us all with the same paint brush and same colour. I am happy with my lot, YEHArrrrrrrrr.
    Young Simmo
    30th Apr 2014
    12:49am
    Yes Engy, there are a Million Nomads with a million different stories, but some people still like to paint us all with the same paint brush and same colour. I am happy with my lot, YEHArrrrrrrrr.
    Young Simmo
    5th May 2014
    7:07pm
    At least Radish you acknowledge I have a brain, sorry but I can't afford you the same compliment. Maybe when you start primary school, it will start to develop.
    Radish
    29th Apr 2014
    1:29pm
    I am saying, just as the rules say, if you are aged 65 and pass the assets and eligibility test you will get an aged pension.
    I believe the assets test is too generous and it should be scaled back.
    for your information I receive nothing whatsoever from the government even though I worked all my life and also paid taxes (and continue to do so)
    so I have no vested interest
    Blossom
    30th Apr 2014
    12:48am
    My cousin is on aged pension, has one ordinary car and a small house(not worth a lot compared to most). I always thought one car was exempt from Assets test. Apparently not so. She has to state the value of the car in each updated assessment.
    Radish
    30th Apr 2014
    11:08am
    My comments re Grey Nomads are only directed to those who are almost fully self funded and get a very small pension. I personally know a great many who do own their own homes (some canal homes worth a great deal of money) who have "not" had to sell these homes to fund their grey nomad lifestyle. I am not in any way criticising those who live permanently in caravans and travel around . I also made comment "that not everyone can do this " which what the Grey Nomads do (spend a number of months every year following the sun).
    Radish
    30th Apr 2014
    11:08am
    My comments re Grey Nomads are only directed to those who are almost fully self funded and get a very small pension. I personally know a great many who do own their own homes (some canal homes worth a great deal of money) who have "not" had to sell these homes to fund their grey nomad lifestyle. I am not in any way criticising those who live permanently in caravans and travel around . I also made comment "that not everyone can do this " which what the Grey Nomads do (spend a number of months every year following the sun).
    Anonymous
    30th Apr 2014
    2:10pm
    Does everyone gree with the current Labor PPL where everybody gets the minmum wage as well as any company scheme .
    This ends up as public servants for instance on 150, 000 a year get full pay plus the minimum wage.
    Ruthie
    5th May 2014
    6:31pm
    The attack on our senior citizens is appalling. The Commission of Audit panel was personally chosen by Tony Abbott and represented the rich end of town. Tony Abbott is proving to be the sneaky lying person thinking voters always suspected - anything to gain power. Why wasn't the rich end of town targeted by the audit panel? The latest announcement of a 'debt levy' is what it look like, smells like and actually is a to use Tony Abbott's own words: a great,big new tax! If the 16% debt levy concession for millionaire superannuants were removed and the savings put into revenue, it would realise $35 billion.
    Tony Shepherd, the smirking Commissioner, when asked why these people were not targeted in the audit looked very uncomfortable and after ums and ahs replied: "We weren't asked to comment on them." Enough said!

    All very well to expect people to work till they are 70 - decided by someone who would not know what hard physical labour really is for hours each day.

    Don't blame me, I didn't vote for Tony Abbott.


    Join YOURLifeChoices, it’s free

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