The solution to the retirement poverty trap

Font Size:

Retirees are hurting with one in four now living in poverty in Australia. Matt Grudnoff, a senior economist at The Australia Institute, has the solution. 

Rising electricity prices and housing costs are hurting many retirees. I’ll repeat those words – hurting many retirees. The stark reality is that one in four retirees is living in poverty.

There is considerable government and community focus on how rising costs are affecting young people, but retirees who rent are bearing the brunt of the price increases.

The Retirement Affordability Index™ was established by YourLifeChoices and The Australia Institute to shine a light on exactly these issues. The index for the December quarter shows that the cost of living is rising fastest for retirees who rent, the tribe on the lowest incomes and who can least afford soaring electricity bills.

The problems highlighted by our index are particularly stark when viewed in an international context. The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) ranks Australia as the third worst for rates of poverty among retired people in the 35 developed nations – behind Korea and Latvia.

Disturbingly, the organisation estimates that a quarter of retired Australians live in poverty, which is twice the OECD average of 12.5 per cent.

Australia’s retirement income system must be made simpler and the amount of money paid via the Age Pension must be increased to permit retired people to live in dignity.

What can we do about this problem? Are there solutions?

At the heart of the problem is an Age Pension system that is both inadequate and hugely complex. But there is a solution – a Universal Age Pension.

There are two parts to government support for incomes in retirement: the Age Pension and superannuation tax concessions. The means-tested Age Pension provides income support directly for those who qualify and superannuation tax concessions increase the value of workers’ super over their lifetime, making more funds available in retirement.

The means testing of the Age Pension results in pension payments being focused mainly on lower income retirees, while the far less means-tested superannuation tax concessions mean that the majority of the tax concessions go to high-income earners.

The Government likes to tell us that the Age Pension is unsustainable. However, over the past three years, spending on the Age Pension has grown by an average of four per cent a year, while superannuation tax concessions have grown by an average of 10 per cent per year. And Treasury predicts the concessions will grow by that same amount for the next three years.

This year, the combined cost of the Age Pension and superannuation tax concessions will be $80 billion. The problem is not that too little is being spent to support incomes in retirement, it is that too much of it is being spent providing a subsidy to those with multimillion-dollar super accounts, while many retired people continue to live in poverty.

A solution is to combine the two parts of the retiree income support into a Universal Age Pension. A Universal Age Pension would be a payment made to anyone over the age of 67, regardless of their income or assets. A similar system operates in New Zealand, which has a poverty rate of one in 10 compared with our one in four.

The main advantage of a Universal Age Pension is that the whole system becomes simpler. It reduces the cost of administration to both the Government and to retirees. No more having to work out if you’re eligible for a pension or part-pension. No more asset or income tests.

The rate of the Universal Age Pension also needs to be increased to tackle the scandalous rates of poverty among Australia’s retirees.

The Universal Age Pension would be increased from the current 30 per cent of total male earnings to 37.5 per cent of total male earnings. The single pension base rate would rise from $814 per fortnight to $1063 per fortnight and the couple rate by a commensurate amount.

This would be funded through the abolition of superannuation tax concessions.

If this occurred, not only would the Universal Age Pension be fully funded but the Government would also have change left over to the tune of about $15 billion per year.

The reason for this is that the cost of superannuation tax concessions has been rising rapidly and in the next few years is likely to be more costly than the Age Pension.

The superannuation guarantee – the compulsory 9.5 per cent of workers’ income that employers pay into employee super accounts – would continue. Without superannuation tax concessions, super balances would be lower, particularly for high-wealth individuals, but super would become a top-up to the Universal Age Pension.

The idea is that the Age Pension would be universally available and sufficient to sustain people in retirement. It would end the situation where the inequality in people’s working life is magnified by superannuation in retirement.

The Universal Age Pension would also improve older people’s participation in the workforce. The choice to work even a few hours has meant possibly having your pension reduced. With a Universal Age Pension, additional work will not change the amount received.

New Zealand, with its Universal Age Pension, has higher work participation rates for older workers than Australia.

The $15 billion per year that this policy change would save could be used to increase public housing stocks for retirees who don’t own their own home. This would further strengthen the safety net for retirees who rent.

The idea that the Age Pension is unsustainable and that we need to accept the high rates of poverty facing retired people is simply wrong. Reform does not need to break the budget. We just need to more efficiently and fairly distribute the money already being used to boost retirement incomes.

A system with integrity and fairness at its core should reflect the underlying purpose of having a pension in the first place: Every Australian should be able to live in retirement with dignity.

Join YourLifeChoices today
and get this free eBook!

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

RELATED LINKS

Retirement Affordability Index December 2017

We help you to calculate where your money is going.

Report favours wage hikes over increased super contributions

The Grattan Institute says compulsory super increases should be put on hold.

Critics line up to lambast Age Pension system

There is a problem. At least that is what an overwhelming number of retirees say when asked about

Written by Matt Grudnoff

397 Comments

Total Comments: 397
  1. 0
    0

    its so obviously a no brainer to follow the Kay-One DoubleEwe-One (KIWI) system that obviously works for a lessor economic power than Oz.
    Pick the eyes out of their methodology…..get a NGO inviolate mob to test drive a scheme suitable for us.

    I think they pay a tax structure if you get amounts of income above a point so the mega wealthy will pay a share…….something some are escaping now.

    • 0
      0

      Yes – income (etc) above pension enters the normal tax regime – not sure how they handle the tax free threshold or if it is from Dollar One…. I did figures on that once – lost somewhere now…

      Wait for the whines of the fat cat superannuants ….. they can’t do figures – I think I worked out that under the tax-free threshold, a couple would need to already be getting $100k in super on top of pension before it would make any difference to the current setup.

      It’s like the argument I put forward over massive salaries for the top dogs (such as my cousin’s husband).. I calculated that his then salary of around $100k could be paid at $60k if he paid the same rate as Joe Bloggs on far less – no way would he come at that… he’d rather pay more tax to retain his ‘status’ as a high income earner.

      It’s called snobbery…. nothing more nor less…. now wait for all the entitlement people who’ve ‘earned’ their money, obviously nobody else has but has spent it on piss and pokies etc …… (ROFL emoticon required)…

    • 0
      0

      It would be good if super remains tax free for those over 60 too.

    • 0
      0

      Why? You already have a free ride on super.. now you want another? Is that something to do with the attitude that you’ve ‘earned your money’ but everyone else is a wastrel and a loser etc?

      You can’t expect both a pension and not to be taxed on your incomes.

    • 0
      0

      I have already paid tax on the money in my super fund so taxing it again is wrong as it is a double tax on that money.

    • 0
      0

      You got a concession -you don’t get a second bite…

    • 0
      0

      No concessions for me.

    • 0
      0

      Greed has no end Trebor. And the same people who attack anyone who points to the inequities in the system that disadvantage those who have modest savings are always the ones who scream loudest if it appears they might lose a little of their massive hoard. OG shouts down anyone who complains about an unfair means test, but threaten to end his fat and grossly unfair tax concessions and he bellows.

    • 0
      0

      Problem is Rainey I just can’t find any of those grossly unfair tax concessions anywhere in my affairs.

    • 0
      0

      Of course not, OG, because like all the GREEDY PRIVILEGED, you think handouts to the wealthy are fair entitlements, whereas handouts to the less well-off are unfair indulgence. The rich NEVER admit to being over-indulged. They don’t even see what is real. They live in la-las land – by choice!

    • 0
      0

      No handouts for me Rainey.

    • 0
      0

      The other one plays Jingle Bells, OG.

    • 0
      0

      I thought it was Green Sleeves.

    • 0
      0

      Perhaps Green Slaves….

  2. 0
    0

    Trebor Scheme – don’t forget the tax on all income fringe benefits and ‘giftings’ deemed to be part of income.

    As usual, the common sense solution advocated from the coalface of society needs to be ‘validated’ by some ‘learned body’ before it c an receive any attention.

    Hence my creation some years past of ‘The Learned Professor of BOSHT – the Bleedingly Obvious Stated in High Sounding Terms’ – as a teaching tool…. ‘learned professors’ can preach about anything and it attains instant recognition…. the first example was our protest about annual burn-offs of the bush in remote areas which nearly killed me every year with smoke and heart troubles… then out of the blue a ‘learned professor’ from ANU came up with the same reasoning about burn-offs in remote areas – they achieved nothing but smoke.

    Suddenly the idea was ‘mainstream’…. what a loser society it is when it needs someone who has spent years in academia to tell it how to run things on the ground…..

    Now we see this with the Retirement Packaging Scheme or System….

    All we need to do now is take it out of the hands of politicians and their mates, who see it as a fabulous Alladin’s Cave of slush funding…

  3. 0
    0

    It will probably only be enough to pay my tax every year if I am lucky so is no benefit to me at all.

    • 0
      0

      Thanks for the hoot – but I did tell you that once before – you’d be no worse off… you wouldn’t have a bar of it.

      It shouldn’t be a benefit for you – it is only to even out the current imbalances with the same rules for all in real terms.

    • 0
      0

      You mean a way of bringing me back down to your level. That just aint going to happen.

    • 0
      0

      ‘My’ level? You were never that good and never will be. You are free to refuse a pension, but you will pay tax on your income and deemed income.

      (ROFL emoticon required again)…

    • 0
      0

      NO I don’t pay tax on deemed income as one only pays tax on income actually earned. Then again that income is higher than any deemed income so maybe paying tax on deemed instead of actual income is a good idea.

    • 0
      0

      When you think of it the “deeming” is a nonsense really. Only real income should ever be considered. You can’t just make up stuff which is exactly what deeming is. Making up stuff.

    • 0
      0

      Deeming was bought in to make it easier to work out someone’s income rather than working out their actual income. Imagine working the income out if every one had 50 different shares.

    • 0
      0

      You mean Centrelink doesn’t ‘deem’ certain things as income? What about that assets test then……

      What about fringe benefits then? Free ride?

      What about gifting from your own company? Free ride again?

      Past concession on super?

      Past concessions on serial property ownership?

      Past concessions on company operation?

      Free rides are unsustainable and are causing the nation to borrow billions every year and will be a burden of debt passed on to future generations….

      (aaaaaaaah … ha, ha, ha, ha, ha)….

      Told you long ago ‘we’ need to be looking at the sum total of government expenditure to find where the true black holes are…. not just pointing the finger at pensions and social security.

    • 0
      0

      Got none of those things.

    • 0
      0

      Hey BOB, not exactly a ROFL emoticon but you may find something to fill the gap here.
      https://www.alt-codes.
      et/smiley_alt_codes.php

    • 0
      0

      There you go! Proof positive of why common sense fairness can NEVER prevail in this nation. The stinking HAVE TOO MUCH brigade are way too GREEDY. OG claims to live on very little, but now he’s bellyaching at the prospect of having to pay his way in society for a change, so that those who worked much harder but were paid much less can have modest comfort in their old age.

    • 0
      0

      I am more likely to benefit than lose from such a scheme. However it would be very selfish of me to endorse such a scheme as I simply don’t need any more money to fund my lifestyle.

    • 0
      0

      Which is why you started this dialog whinging about getting no benefit. It’s called HYPOCRISY, OG.

    • 0
      0

      So now because I disagree with a scheme that I will benefit from I now a hypocrite? I’m not whinging about anything but can’t say the same about you.

    • 0
      0

      You whined at the start. You changed your tack because you were called out. That hypocritical.

      Yes, I’m whinging about a scheme that costs the nation far too much and leaves 1/4 of retirees in poverty. I don’t like supporting a BAD SYSTEM. My personal situation – which is perfectly acceptable – has nothing to do with my position or views. If everyone were as well off as me, there would be no problem and no need for change.

    • 0
      0

      Well stop whinging and abusing people then Rainey as it has nothing at all to do with you.

    • 0
      0

      No, OG. I’ll continue to speak out against injustice and stupidity that is harmful to the nation. In a democracy (or even a PRETEND democracy), successful government and beneficial policy relies on the active participation of citizens who have the integrity to focus on what’s good for the nation and the courage to speak out.

    • 0
      0

      Have you ever thought that it isn’t all about you OG.

    • 0
      0

      Some fine choices there,OM… thanks…

    • 0
      0

      It’s not about me at all as I don’t get or need any welfare handouts from the government.

    • 0
      0

      Your posts are ALWAYS ABOUT YOU, OG. Never any consideration for others, much less that national good.

    • 0
      0

      Actually my posts have nothing at all to do with me.

    • 0
      0

      I quote you, OG:

      It will probably only be enough to pay MY tax every year if I am lucky so is no benefit to ME at all.

      You mean a way of bringing ME back down to your level. That just aint going to happen.

      I don’t get any tax concessions so you are barking up the wrong tree.

      Wrong I put lump sums that I had already paid tax on into my super fund. I didn’t get any super instead of wage rises etc and I haven’t had a job since super became compulsory.

      Just a small selection of posts that are typically nearly ALWAYS about YOU, OG.

    • 0
      0

      So what my shoes are not a fit for everyone. I doubt if yours are either.

    • 0
      0

      Obviously you can’t read, or have a comprehension problem, OG. A quarter of retirees are living in poverty. Millions qualify for an aged pension. NO NO NO your shoes are NOT a fit for the majority. You are the exception – not the rule. So am I, but unlike you I don’t focus on my situation except to confirm that I don’t speak from self-interest. My posts support change that benefits the nation and the majority of the population. Unlike you, I support change that ends the welfare mentality and encourages endeavour and responsible lifestyle choices. I don’t object to people having what they earned and deserve. I object to a system that drives manipulation and dishonesty and rewards overspending.

    • 0
      0

      So I shouldn’t be seeing so many OAPs crowding out coffee shops then with their fancy cakes and coffee? I can never understand why people do this as it’s so expensive.

    • 0
      0

      Or cruise ships patronised by 80% plus that are on welfare.

    • 0
      0

      How do you KNOW any of these people are on OAP ONLY, Ebergeezer Scrooge? Do you follow them home and steal their mail?

    • 0
      0

      They all tell me how well they are doing on the OAP.

    • 0
      0

      And from comments by a handful you meet personally, you draw wild and insanely inaccurate assumptions, instead of considering REAL DATA? No wonder you get it wrong most of the time.

    • 0
      0

      Now where does that real data come from? I don’t know of anyone who tells the truth about their affairs so no such thing as real data.

    • 0
      0

      Ah, so you admit to consorting with cheats and liars? No wonder you get such wildly inaccurate data and form such crazily wrong opinions.

    • 0
      0

      Everyone is a cheat and liar and to tell me differently you would be lying yourself.

    • 0
      0

      No OG. Only the cheats and liars tell themselves that to salve their guilty conscience. I don’t lie to anyone – least of all me. And the government knows EXACTLY what I have, in every detail that is required to be stated.

    • 0
      0

      One must ask why you have told the government anything if you are not on welfare. I have told them nothing and they have asked me for nothing.

    • 0
      0

      I lodge tax returns OG. Like all HONEST citizens.

    • 0
      0

      I also respond truthfully to census questions.

    • 0
      0

      Same here, Rainey – jeez – I can ring ASIO and they say, “Hello, Bob”….

    • 0
      0

      OG:-

      No – you’re not a hypocrite for that… you have many other ways of attaining that status….

      and…

      NO, your shoes do not fit everyone…they can only fit you…..

      Thank you for your contributions….

    • 0
      0

      OUR so you are an angel. Why not give your wings some exercise and fly away?

    • 0
      0

      Who is OUR? Me, I’m just an honest, law-abiding citizen with integrity. Lots of us around, BigBear. Sad that you aren’t among them.

    • 0
      0

      Gee I thought you more of an angel that does nothing wrong as well.

  4. 0
    0

    Well, Heaven Forbid that such a workable and fair system would get installed here ! Absolutely out of the question ! Why, that would mean the moronic Australians have yet again followed the lead of the Kiwis !

    • 0
      0

      New Zealand can afford to pay a pension to all because their economy is booming now.

    • 0
      0

      Clearly Australia could also afford it if the dickheads in Canberra got their s%%t together !

    • 0
      0

      Nothing wrong with our current OAP scheme.

    • 0
      0

      Are you serious ? Have you not read the content of the article above ?

    • 0
      0

      Yes I read it and it would not matter how much money OAPs got it would never be enough for most of them.

    • 0
      0

      There is a lot wrong with it OG. One in 4 in poverty for a start and free money to wealthy people over a certain age.

      A fair society tries to treat everyone equally and our system isn’t fair and the superannuation tax concession growth makes it far from sustainable.

      Changes will need to be made.

      Our economy would be booming too if the LNP stopped selling off assets that raise revenue and worked on getting deals that benefit Australia over the line rather than setting up policies so that the ALP will fail next time in office but that destroy the Nations prosperity as a consequence.

      Prime example is the 60 years of free, unlimited water offer to Adani. Madness.

      Or the Bail in laws passed last week we are not supposed to know about.

    • 0
      0

      Any money taken out of a super fund after 60 has no more tax payable. It was either taxed at 15% or 30% or tax at their marginal rate before it was put into super. So tax has already been paid on it. Most people with other income would be better off it wasn’t tax free but came with tax credits.

    • 0
      0

      Except that if you had a low income, you got ZERO tax credits and paid the full rate on your super contributions. If you had a modest income, you got some minor tax credits. If you had a BIG FAT OBSCENELY HIGH INCOME you GOT HUGE CREDITS AND THE TAXPAYER FUNDED A LUXURIOUS RETIREMENT.

      That’s the problem. The super tax concessions fund lavish retirement for the rich and do nothing for the struggling poor. But then the struggling poor are persecuted in old age by the GREEDY SELF-SERVING RICH who are never satisfied, despite getting MASSIVE handouts all their working lives.

    • 0
      0

      Our economy would boom too if the greedy stopped screaming for more and acknowledged that this proposal is sensible and economically beneficial. But the likes of OG will never let it happen. Far too self-serving. Got to keep the battlers down so the fat cats can continue to gloat. And only those who want to persecute strugglers and over-feed the rich would endorse the disgracefully inefficient, unfair and economically detrimental system we currently have. But sadly all the power lies in the hands of those self-serving rich gloaters!

    • 0
      0

      If you put after tax money into your super fund then because it has already been taxed then no tax is payable when you withdraw it.

    • 0
      0

      If you were well-paid, it WAS NOT TAXED FAIRLY and should be taxed heavily on withdrawal. Only those on low incomes paid fair tax on super contributions.

    • 0
      0

      No point in putting money into super if you are going to get taxed a lot more than if you had left it out of super. Only a mug would put money into super and would get it out as fast as he could if it was put in super for him.

    • 0
      0

      Oh, so according to OGs Illogic, a system that only benefits rich manipulators and persecutes those with fewer choices and/or those with less sophisticated financial knowledge is good. A system that works fairly for all and is economically advantageous to the nation is bad – because it doesn’t feed obscene greed!

    • 0
      0

      Nothing wrong with our system at all. The top 20% now pay 80% of the taxes and you wan them to pay more? Give them a break.

    • 0
      0

      Rubbish – they do not… many a pie chart will show that.

    • 0
      0

      A myth the greedy rich love to peddle. But it all comes down to how you do the sums, doesn’t it? There are lies, damn lies, and statistics. And this 20% yarn falls into all three categories.

    • 0
      0

      .. and they get 100% of the tax deductions…..

      You call that a system in balance?

    • 0
      0

      It is easy to make a million. Start with 2 million.

    • 0
      0

      Oh, so you have finally pulled back from that ridiculous nonsense about it being all due to hard work? About time!

    • 0
      0

      I guess if you made your money by foul means than you expect everyone else did too. Unfortunately some of us worked while the rest partied and now they just don’t get it does actually take a lot of hard work to be successful.

    • 0
      0

      Most of us worked out guts out, but didn’t get wealthy, OG. Because it takes a hell of a lot more than just hard work to get wealthy. You, of course, would know nothing about that, because you don’t know what hard work is. If you did, you wouldn’t denigrate those who slogged their guts out to make OTHERS well-off.

    • 0
      0

      No nice clean silver platters for me either Rainey. I started with nothing like many others did but through a lot of hard work I got to where I am today.

    • 0
      0

      Another of your fantasies! It’s easy to tell who worked hard, OG. They support a system that fosters and rewards hard work, and they have empathy and compassion for the less fortunate. You are THE STINKING PRIVILEGED who has never experienced hardship and wouldn’t know what hard work is. That is very apparent from your attitude, as almost everyone here has noted at some point.

    • 0
      0

      No I don’t have an empathy or compassion for those who partied while I worked hard. They are nothing but whingers who failed to provide for their own retirement.

    • 0
      0

      Again playing God. How the hell would you know who partied? Plenty of folk who are needy in retirement wouldn’t know what it was to party. They suffered crisis, illness, injustice… all sorts of reasons why they are hard up now. But self-serving presumptive ASSES with no decency or humanity can’t accept reality. They have to make nasty untruthful assertions to salve their conscience over being so greedy.

  5. 0
    0

    I can’t see one reason why this scheme wouldn’t work except the mentality of a Government that resents supporting the elderly even when all the benefits of such a scheme are pointed out

  6. 0
    0

    Great idea, Matt. However, the pensioners in poverty don’t have the ear of the current federal government, the people with millions in super do and will fight tooth and nail to keep their tax deductible contributions

  7. 0
    0

    I can’t think of any country with a more complicated system than Australia. It’s as if they want to punish older people. I get a small pension from overseas. It’s for life and no questions asked. All they want to know (once a year) is that I’m still alive. I hope that Labor will adopt the universal pension. With the Libs we have no hope at all.

  8. 0
    0

    sounds like a no brainer and makes a lot of sense once again the government wanting to look after younger people who are young strong fit yet so many do not wish to work as opposed to the older Australians whose ragged bodies that time has taken toll on can no longer work yet wish to and cannot find employment come on Canberra wake up, get your priorities right before it’s too late. Cheers Jacka.

  9. 0
    0

    There’s a major problem with this proposal Three problems, actually. It’s common sense. It would work. It wouldn’t feed the greedy rich.

    This government has no interest in anything common sense, much less anything that would work. And it CERTAINLY will NEVER consider any proposal that doesn’t feed the greedy rich and maintain their privilege. So we can all forget it. It ain’t gonna happen!

    • 0
      0

      That’s why we have such a welfare mentality in this country today. Heaven forbid anyone that gets wealthy as they are now seen as doing it by foul means instead of all the hard work they did while everyone else was partying away.

    • 0
      0

      Wrong, Old Fool. We have a welfare mentality because our STUPID system rewards greed and manipulation and punishes honesty, integrity, hard work and responsible living.

      And yes, the majority of wealthy DID get it by foul means – or maintain it by foul means. Wealth comes mostly from inheritance or crime and is maintained mostly be exploitation of both labour and the tax system. It’s all but impossible to get wealthy by honest means from a poor start, and certainly hard work does not generate wealth. The hardest workers are paid the least.

    • 0
      0

      So you got your wealth by foul means then. I certainly didn’t.

    • 0
      0

      No, OG. I don’t have any wealth. I got a home by building it myself, working weekends, nights and holidays for 10 years and sourcing materials from recycling businesses and junk yards, while living in very uncomfortable conditions. My partner and I made all our clothing, furniture and soft furnishings – almost exclusively from recycled stuff other dumped. And we taught ourselves to repair cars and appliances. We grew much of our own food.

      I am comfortable now because I continue to work and earn despite being well past retirement age, and I am very self-sufficient and a good money manager, and we own a nice home because of our own building efforts.

    • 0
      0

      That what most of us did Rainey.

    • 0
      0

      No, OG. Very few did that. Very few indeed. And you CERTAINLY didn’t. If you did, you would not have the nasty attitude you display in your posts here. Real battlers have empathy and compassion and care about fairness.

    • 0
      0

      And you claim wealth, OG. NOBODY got wealthy doing what I did. NOBODY. You can’t invest the time it takes to do all of that and still earn a high income.

    • 0
      0

      Real battlers can’t stand whingers either as they get on with life instead of wasting their time and energy whinging.

    • 0
      0

      You are the biggest whinger here, OG – whinging loudly every time anyone even hints at supporting changes to make life better for those who don’t have it so good, and whinging endlessly that people who lost the pension under the assets test ”had it too good” before, plus attacking anyone who dares to suggest or indicate support for positive change.

    • 0
      0

      The change in the asset test was a positive change so now hinging from me about it.

    • 0
      0

      Only fools who want to grow a welfare mentality and wreck the nation think it was positive.

    • 0
      0

      So because I think it was an awesome idea that people who don’t need to OAP don’t now get it I’m a fool. Rubbish.

    • 0
      0

      You think you are God, don’t you? How the hell would you know who needs what? And why should people who can’t pass the assets test be disadvantaged while much richer folk are grossly overindulged? The pension is nothing more than a negative tax. Those who got big tax concessions were overindulged unfairly, but they are the same GREEDY CREEPS who now begrudge the less well off who got NOTHING in earlier life a little comfort. SELFISH.

    • 0
      0

      I pity anyone you come across who is wealthy Rainey if you say things like that to them.

    • 0
      0

      I call it like it is, OG. If a wealthy person has integrity and human decency, I treat them accordingly. Sadly, most don’t.

    • 0
      0

      All the wealthy people I know are very generous and will help others whenever they can. I do the same myself.

    • 0
      0

      ROFL……. *re-thinks*……. ROFL again…

    • 0
      0

      ROFL, SMH and LMFAO.

    • 0
      0

      I’ve consorted with ‘rich’ people in the Eastern suburbs of Sydney, and drunk among them at the Foolgarah Hotel… they are primarily peasants in fine suits with no solid values……

      At one time at the Foolgarah, my dear lady friend was insulted by an ‘Alan Bond’ type – you know the type – a ‘fire plug of a man’ with a hostile countenance and a couterie of fine lasses who hung on his every word since he paid their way…. my lady friend wanted me to challenge him over that insult… instead I played him… and he become more and more irate with no real avenue to let it out….. I’m a bastard like that…. contributing to his inevitable heart attack….

      On another occasion, at the Double Bay Sailing Club, a very exclusive members only venue, I chose to leave when a friend was thrown out….. I didn’t much like the clientele anyway – they had a sort of Mediterranean look of no class…… hardly my type at all….

      All true….

    • 0
      0

      So you consorted with the rich if could be in the eastern suburbs of Sydney. I lived there once myself so know the sort of people you would have consorted with. They are not my type either.

      The wealthy people I know are like the people next door who most think are just ordinary folk.

    • 0
      0

      Ah, so now you are admitting that you are choosey about your associations with the wealthy. In other words, you know how obnoxious most are. And having exposed your hypocrisy on the subject of savings, we can now all be content to write you off as a foolish old hypocrite who says whatever suits at the moment and has no sincerity, let alone humanity or respect.

    • 0
      0

      I only associate with the real wealthy not the would be if could be ones that most associate with being wealthy.

    • 0
      0

      *falls about laughing*

    • 0
      0

      My wealth is in my character and humanity, both honed over years of hell.

  10. 0
    0

    Our governments tamper with the age pension in various ways, including shrinking the assets test as from 1.1.17, so that aged pensioners, especially those on the full pension, get less and less.
    And those with a few more assets still get less and less, so that all pensioners get less and less.
    I lost $14K per year when this lousy govt changed the assets test as from 1.1.17, something I (and thousands of others) will never ever forgive or forget.
    The govt pulled the rug out from under us and stuffed up our retirement, which we planned based on legitimate criteria at the time.
    No mercy for this lousy government at the next election, and its time pensioners organised a voice in parliament, so that equity and fairness will be back in the equation.
    The CPSA claims to be the representatives for the aged pensioners, but they are as useless as tits on a bull. In fact, they supported Abbott and the Greens when they changed the assets test in the 2015 budget, claiming it would make the age pension “more sustainable”.
    What a load of BS.
    All the politiicians had to do was recover lost tax revenue from the big end of town and rein in their own salaries and lurks and perks (including their life-long taxpayer funded pensions), so that fairness and equity prevails.
    But first we need to kick them out of office, and replace them with a new fresh team who ‘promise” fairness (but no broken promises like those of Abbott and his cronies)

    • 0
      0

      Good thing they changed the asset test as it was way too generous and those who got les OAP didn’t need it but it was nice to have while it lasted.

    • 0
      0

      Says the greedy person who doesn’t want change because it wouldn’t benefit him, and who cares nothing for the harm done to the nation by making manipulation, cheating and irresponsible living much more beneficial. But of course he mortally HATES seeing battlers given a helping hand. Got to cut down the growing poppies. They might take some of his and his tall poppy mates sunlight!

    • 0
      0

      Assets = deemed income….. so when the new system comes in, those who are getting freebies will find them deemed as income.

      The principal reason this kind of scheme will never get off the ground here is that it will directly impact politicians and their mates who are in the retirement pipeline to paying no tax after a plentiful free ride.

    • 0
      0

      The Old Geeser is obviously a LNP Govt stooge, who doesn’t know the meaning of equitable fairness.

    • 0
      0

      I don’t vote for any of them so what sort of stooge does that make me.

    • 0
      0

      Pull it again, OG. Do you seriously expect us to believe that crap when your political persuasion is so very apparent?

    • 0
      0

      So you are telling me I should tell my lackey who turns up and marks my name of the electoral roll that they should vote for me a certain way. Quite frankly I couldn’t care less.

    • 0
      0

      Well, a stingy stooge otherwise….

    • 0
      0

      A paid one who is not a citizen – he’s already said he doesn’t vote…… obviously he doesn’t live here at all… he must be doing a Marlon Brando and beaming his stories in from an offshore island or a pirate radio ship….

Load More Comments

FACEBOOK COMMENTS



SPONSORED LINKS

continue reading

Finance

Making it easy to buy Australian

Research shows that since the pandemic an overwhelming number of Australians want to buy locally produced products to support the...

Finance

What your car costs - the surprising costs of driving a ute or SUV

Recent research by Finder shows Australians could be paying thousands of dollars more than necessary to keep their car running....

Finance

Best grocery shopping apps

For those aiming to reduce their weekly grocery bill, there are many ways to save at the supermarket.  While the...

Aged Care

Government releases five-year road map to fix a 'national disgrace'

The federal government has delivered its 'initial' response to the Aged Care Quality and Safety Royal Commission findings, with a...

Aged Care

Aged care, death and taxes after the royal commission

Anna Howe, Macquarie University The governor-general was handed the report of the aged care royal commission on Friday. It will...

Health

Honey drinks could be a tasty cold remedy

If you're feeling under the weather, something as simple and accessible as honey could be a tasty remedy. New research...

Prevention

How to find and exercise your pelvic floor muscles

Do you wet yourself a little bit when you laugh, cough or sneeze? Then you might be among the one...

COVID-19

What we know about the recently approved single dose vaccine

Some health experts have expressed concern at the efficacy of the AstraZeneca vaccine, with some stating that we 'only get...

LOADING MORE ARTICLE...