5th Feb 2018
New assets test claims 90,000 Age Pension payments
New assets test claims 90,000 Age Pension payments

The new Age Pension assets and income test claimed the part pension payments of around 90,000 individuals and couples in 2017.

On top of that, hundreds of thousands of Australians who were receiving a full Age Pension had their payments reduced under the Federal Government’s revised rules that came into effect on 1 January 2017.

The new rules caught many older Australian unawares, and those who had based their retirement income on receiving a part Age Pension are now having to re-evaluate their retirement.

The Department of Social Services (DSS) confirmed that around 86,600 part age pensioners had their pension revoked last year.

The new pension taper rate reduced the pensions received by anyone over the threshold by $3 for every $1000.

Official government data revealed that between the 31 December 2016 and 31 June 2017, the number of part age pensioners dropped from 486,031 to 321,106.

While no full-age pensioners had their pensions cancelled due to assets test changes during that time, the total number of Australians receiving a full Age Pension dropped from 2.57 million to 2.49 million.

The number of couples receiving a full or part pension dropped from 1.43 million to 1.37 million, with singles falling from 1.13 million to 1.12 million.

DSS data shows that around 1.18 million pension recipients are couples who own a home, with a further 660,000 home-owning singles.

While the assets test does not (currently) consider the family home as an assessable asset, it does count any other assets owned, such as other property, cars, boats, caravans, superannuation and savings.

Superannuation balances held by many Australians at retirement automatically puts them over the new thresholds. The problem is that super may generate less tax-free income than an Age Pension. Translation: more assets means less money.

So, to receive more tax-free pension and stay under the asset thresholds, many retirees are taking money from superannuation and putting it into improvements or buying new family homes.

However, in doing so, many are leaving themselves short of available funds, becoming asset-rich but cash poor and unable to maintain a comfortable standard of retirement living.

Read more at The Australian

How does the assets and income test affect you? Do you think it’s fair?

RELATED ARTICLES





    COMMENTS

    To make a comment, please register or login
    Ian
    5th Feb 2018
    10:35am
    The $3 per $1000 is not the whole story as the government double dips 'so what is new'
    The government hits you again with the deeming rate of 3.25% which you can't get
    Nan Norma
    5th Feb 2018
    11:45am
    Spot on Ian. I call it dishonest.
    ray from Bondi
    5th Feb 2018
    12:58pm
    it is truly disgusting what governments do to keep their trough full and wanting for nothing, yes it is impossible to find a bank that will offer pensioners the government deeming rate. I seem to remember when this as first forced down out chocking throats that there was a promise that banks would have to supply an account that matched the deeming rate, like all the things that government impose upon us there are changes and then more changes and whatever we were promised have evaporated, will labor fix it, very unlikely.
    Rae
    5th Feb 2018
    1:41pm
    Yes ray. Anyone who needs the daily amount polls need for accomodation and food shouldn't be in charge of anything in my opinion.

    It would have been quite easy to ensure a deeming account rate was offered or that the deeming rate followed interest rates down by pegging it to the RBA rate.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    5th Feb 2018
    1:51pm
    The deeming rate has nothing to do with the deposit rate but is worked out on an amount less than people can earn on their investments. If you put your money in term deposits then you are not investing your money well so you pay the price of getting less than then deeming rate.
    Golden Oldie
    5th Feb 2018
    4:56pm
    When the deeming rate came in, it was to make it simpler for reporting purposing, and at that stage the deeming rate was less than the interest rates freely available on bank deposits. It was also to stop people putting their money into non-interest earning accounts.
    I put some money into an iSaver account. In July 2017 the interest rate was 1.2%. In September it changed to 1.05%, and in January 2018 it now earns the magnificent interest rate of 0.8% Maybe I should buy some shares and lose the lot.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    5th Feb 2018
    5:22pm
    Isaver was good when you could reset the introductory rate each 3 months.

    If you set up a Reward Saver Account you get 2.5% interest which is better than term deposit interest. Many pensioners use these accounts now instead of term deposits.

    All you then have to do is make a $1 deposit each month and make no withdrawals. You can even set a periodic payment of $1 so it happens automatically.

    Ok if you need to make withdrawals then set up more than one reward saver account so that you get maximum interest on some of your accounts.
    Greg
    6th Feb 2018
    3:11pm
    BigBear when deeming started it was at a reasonable percentage, all the banks had accounts that earned the deeming rate but over time the deeming rates have not reduced as much as the official interest rates.

    People, particularly when in retirement, use TD's because they are safe - we can't all gamble our funds, risk losing half their value and still have enough for a decent retirement. I guess you can?
    VeryCaringBigBear
    6th Feb 2018
    3:18pm
    I don't have enough assets now to worry about investing it and I also don't need any more income. I don't use TDs myself as there are better bank investments that earn more than TDs do so I use them for little spare cash I have.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    8th Feb 2018
    12:53pm
    We all know that, BigBear, because you manipulated to make your assets invisible to Centrelink and claim a pension you should not be receiving.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    10th Feb 2018
    4:33pm
    I now only have enough assets to get the full OAP which are quite visable to Centrelink. I have no other assets visible or invisible.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    10th Feb 2018
    7:43pm
    Only the assets you gave away so that you can call on relatives to pay bills for you. Invisible assets, created by dishonest manipulation to cheat the taxpayer. You can't escape it, UNcaringBigBear. It's unethical. It's immoral. It's abuse of a system that was never intended to facilitate that kind of self-serving behaviour. And it imposes unfairly on others.
    tropic
    5th Feb 2018
    10:58am
    A Liberal government doing what they do best. Filling their own pockets and don't give a F*** about the rest.
    Polly Esther
    5th Feb 2018
    11:13am
    don't vote for them then . That'll show them :-)))
    Tib
    5th Feb 2018
    11:41am
    Polly I agree many older Australians complain about this government but line up to vote for the Liberals at election time. If you voted for them you deserve it. But I didn't and neither should you. If you want things to change vote them out.
    Rae
    5th Feb 2018
    11:57am
    Tib it's the propaganda of calling themselves " conservatives" when their far right has been fascist since the days they admired Hitler and Mussolini in Melbourne Headquarters of the New Guard.

    How older voters that fought WW11 can vote for them is beyond my understanding.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    5th Feb 2018
    11:13am
    The OAP is still way too generous and many people who get it don't need it.
    Triss
    5th Feb 2018
    11:45am
    Put your money where your mouth is, BigBear, write to CentreLink and tell them you don't need it and they can cut your pension by 50%.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    5th Feb 2018
    11:59am
    Ha ha it better not to go anywhere near Centrelink as it's waste way too much times in queues for me.
    Cowboy Jim
    5th Feb 2018
    12:16pm
    They might not need it but they still use it and so contribute in some way to the income and taxation of the nation. Without pension spending in our area many shops would have to close. Not everyone wants a life of miserly scrimping and saving for the grand kids. People who contributed deserve a decent retirement, not only our politicians.
    Hasbeen
    5th Feb 2018
    12:21pm
    I agree. The pension is great for supporting people who have worked all their lives, raising families & not had too much left over.

    However it should not go to pay for European holidays or ocean cruises for those who with more than enough.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    5th Feb 2018
    12:30pm
    The only reason the cruise industry is doing so well in Australia is the number of OAPs now cruising with the Centrelink benefits. A lot of this money is going off shore with all the foreign workers and ships registered in tax havens.

    Only the other day I was doing some research for tours for a group and it was so much cheaper to go on a cruise, go travelling overseas than it was to holiday in Australia. Something is very wrong when an Alaskian cruise is so much cheaper than a cruise in Australia and many times cheaper than holidaying in Australia.
    Greg
    5th Feb 2018
    12:46pm
    They're not cruising with the Centrelink benefits, they are drawing down savings which in turn will allow them a larger pension payment - exactly as this government with Tony & Joe wanted. (Pixie and Dixie)
    VeryCaringBigBear
    5th Feb 2018
    12:50pm
    Then why do they tell people how affordable cruises are when you are on the OAP? Not enough affected by the change to make much difference tot he number of OAPs taking cruises.
    ray from Bondi
    5th Feb 2018
    12:59pm
    bigbear = liberal stoog.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    5th Feb 2018
    1:29pm
    These people on cruises are spending money they have over and above the pension, BigBear. Those with nothing but the pension can't afford to cruise. Wake up to yourself. Your LNP-supporting propaganda is boring.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    5th Feb 2018
    1:47pm
    Sure some might be spending their money on cruises now. However I haven't been on a cruise since the new asset test came in and they were all bragging about how much they can save on the OAP and go on a couple of cruises every year.

    Cruising is not for me as I hate having to dodge all the wheelie walkers and gophers who do their best to run over you. They are also very unhygienic and full of diseases.
    Chris B T
    5th Feb 2018
    2:13pm
    With your original statement, why did you apply for the OAP if you don't need it. You can not speak for anyone else but your self.
    OAP pension has to be applied for and has requirements to be meet before you it is allocated to you. So again why did you apply for it.
    (;-(0)
    VeryCaringBigBear
    5th Feb 2018
    2:25pm
    I didn't apply for the OAP as I got it automatically when I reached OAP age.
    HS
    5th Feb 2018
    4:28pm
    No, BigBear , no one gets a OAP without applying with Centrelink first, It's not automatically handed over to anyone. You are telling ' big fat porkies".
    As for your outrageous statement "The OAP is still way too generous and many people who get it don't need it" One can only conclude that you are one humongous moron.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    5th Feb 2018
    4:35pm
    It was nearly 20 years ago but I don't remember actually applying for the OAP. Every so often I get sent a form asking if my assets and income have changed. I just update them online.

    Maybe I suggest you check your facts before you criticise others with such disgusting language.
    Chris B T
    5th Feb 2018
    5:26pm
    At some stage you would have to applied for the OAP , by completing the required forms each time you are reapplying.
    Stop filling out the forms and see what happens as you said you don't need OAP and it was given to you without applying for it.
    See how automatically you will continue receiving the OAP.
    (;-(
    VeryCaringBigBear
    5th Feb 2018
    5:33pm
    Nothing to it. I just fill and tick a few boxes online when required. Forgot once and they rang and asked me.
    marls
    5th Feb 2018
    7:27pm
    Triss
    Agree seeing civilised countries have no means test for aged pension in nz every person gets the aged pension regards of wealth and can continue to work in Europe again no means test and couples are assessed as individuals my mother receives aged pension from oz and Italian pension plus part of my fathers pension as his deceased plus a small pension from Belgium as he was in the war it's the same in Germany where my Aunty lives it's Australia that penalised the aged
    marls
    5th Feb 2018
    7:27pm
    Triss
    Agree seeing civilised countries have no means test for aged pension in nz every person gets the aged pension regards of wealth and can continue to work in Europe again no means test and couples are assessed as individuals my mother receives aged pension from oz and Italian pension plus part of my fathers pension as his deceased plus a small pension from Belgium as he was in the war it's the same in Germany where my Aunty lives it's Australia that penalised the aged
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    5th Feb 2018
    9:27pm
    Chris BT, BigBear confessed, elsewhere, to having DELIBERATELY given a ton of money away and cruised the world for years JUST SO HE WOULD QUALIFY FOR THE OAP. So yes, he DID apply for it. And not only did he not need it, but he manipulated unethically to qualify for it.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    5th Feb 2018
    10:36pm
    Wrong Rainey I don't like cruises at all. I detest queues and cruises have nothing but queues. Cruises are for old people in wheelchairs, wheelie walkers and gophers.
    TREBOR
    5th Feb 2018
    11:45pm
    Caught out, BB... everyone has to apply for a pension...... or anything else.... your story is becoming diaphanous.....

    I believe we've seen it before on this discussion forum.

    It's called an OOPS moment...
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    6th Feb 2018
    6:25am
    And yet another I DID NOT post. I was sound asleep at 1:06 am.

    Who is doing this?
    VeryCaringBigBear
    6th Feb 2018
    7:40am
    Ha ha so Rainey you are now posting in your dreams.

    Now I'm criminal because Centrelink looks after me so well.

    Just because I worked out early in my working life that one should not work harder but work smarter by learning the rules I am now a cheat, criminal, unethical, fraudster etc. I think I sense a wee lot of envy here.

    Due to a bit of bad luck a kind social worker applied for the the disability pension for me to help pay for my treatment at the time and when I turned 65 I was automatically transferred to the OAP.
    Reason Centrelink do this is that one gets less on the OAP than the disability pension.

    I don't wish to gloat any further about my unfortunate parts of my life.

    So please check your facts before resorting to such awful language people.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    6th Feb 2018
    7:40am
    Ha ha so Rainey you are now posting in your dreams.

    Now I'm criminal because Centrelink looks after me so well.

    Just because I worked out early in my working life that one should not work harder but work smarter by learning the rules I am now a cheat, criminal, unethical, fraudster etc. I think I sense a wee lot of envy here.

    Due to a bit of bad luck a kind social worker applied for the the disability pension for me to help pay for my treatment at the time and when I turned 65 I was automatically transferred to the OAP.
    Reason Centrelink do this is that one gets less on the OAP than the disability pension.

    I don't wish to gloat any further about my unfortunate parts of my life.

    So please check your facts before resorting to such awful language people.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    6th Feb 2018
    10:41am
    So you tell porkies, BigBear? Elsewhere you said you gave tons of money to your grandchildren and you cruised the world for five years to get rid of your money. Now you claim disability. Really are a fraud then? No, I would never envy someone who behaved unethically and immorally to deprive people who genuinely need taxpayer dollars to support them. I'm proud of my integrity.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    6th Feb 2018
    10:57am
    Unlike you Rainey I don't whinge about the bad things that happen in my life. I just hate it when people do whinge about how bad their life is and refuse to do so myself.

    Yes I did travel Australia and the world for nearly 10 years after I retired and did a couple of cruises but they weren't for me.

    Sounds like you had some great dreams last night.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    6th Feb 2018
    11:29am
    Ha ah some one is having fun they are now ANonymous. This is hilarious. ROFL.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    7th Feb 2018
    5:20pm
    Only a sick low-life would think it funny.
    Cowboy Jim
    5th Feb 2018
    11:21am
    Getting a bit tired of reading (as in the article above) that your family home is not considered in the asset test. The figures in front of me in the newest publication from Centrelink show assets must be less than $380,500 for a home owning couple and $583,500 for non home owners. So how can you say the home is not considered? Some of my mates live in houses worth $200'000.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    5th Feb 2018
    11:24am
    Many OAPs live in homes worth many times $200,000 so at $200,000 only a small proportion of their home is included. I certainly wouldn't sell my home for $200,000.
    Nan Norma
    5th Feb 2018
    11:50am
    Not true Bigbear. The value of your house is not considered. Just that you are the owner. You could be paying out a mortgage but makes no difference.
    Rae
    5th Feb 2018
    12:01pm
    Big Bear get over the envy mate. Some people were just lucky to buy in the right place.

    Yes the house is definitely included and also renters receive extra assistance too.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    5th Feb 2018
    12:12pm
    Read this morning that houses prices could fall over 50% in value so we might see a lot more valued at only $200,000.
    Romeital
    5th Feb 2018
    1:39pm
    50% drop if you believe they you’ll believe anything
    VeryCaringBigBear
    5th Feb 2018
    1:55pm
    I actually believe it may fall a lot more than 50% in some areas myself.
    HS
    5th Feb 2018
    4:31pm
    Homes that are defined by Centrelink as place of sole residence for OAP are exempt from the assets test.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    5th Feb 2018
    4:36pm
    HS if you have more than one residence you can nominate which one you would like exempt from the assets test.
    ronloby
    5th Feb 2018
    11:43am
    It's about time these RICH polies try living on OAP! They do not care about anyone except there own little world! Give themselves a pay rise but bugger everyone else. I believe the GG should step in as the Queen's representative and brig the government into line. But then again he is with them so nothing will happen.
    Rae
    5th Feb 2018
    11:54am
    The Government lied to me for decades as my compulsory contributions were taken after full tax with promises of a discount card. Lying betrayers never to be trusted obviously.
    AutumnOz
    5th Feb 2018
    1:33pm
    Super is currently a rip off in my opinion, it will be OK once the 50 year paying in period is up but it is a disaster for those of us who only had very few years to pay into super.
    I think the "discount card" is now called a Seniors Card which comes from the State government. There is only one shop in my area, the bakery, which offers the seniors card discount so it isn't much good unless you buy a lot of bread and other bakery items.
    Rae
    5th Feb 2018
    1:50pm
    I was thinking about the pension concession card Autumn.
    Captain
    5th Feb 2018
    1:54pm
    Autumn Oz, Super is not the rip off, it is the LNP, Abbot & Hockey, who decided that those with about 30 years of Super accumulation would bear the brunt of successive Governments lack of foresight.

    The cutting of the Assets Test Limit by about 25% in the 2014 Budget was a kick in the guts for many who had tried to maximize their savings and still receive a small part pension. The changes should have been grandfathered for those who retired before January 1, 2017.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    5th Feb 2018
    2:01pm
    You mean these people affected by the asset test change manipulated their affairs to get a very small pension and the concession card.
    Captain
    5th Feb 2018
    2:45pm
    Big bear, nowhere did I say that anyone manipulated their affairs in order to obtain a pension. I said some people saved during their working lives and did not reach the then Asset Limit therefore were entitled to a part Pension.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    5th Feb 2018
    3:13pm
    That does not alter the fact that many of those caught out did manipulate their affairs just to get the pensioner concession card.
    Captain
    5th Feb 2018
    3:19pm
    Big bear, how?
    VeryCaringBigBear
    5th Feb 2018
    3:25pm
    One simple way is just draw the money out of their bank account and spend it.
    Captain
    5th Feb 2018
    3:28pm
    More fool them.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    5th Feb 2018
    5:01pm
    Captain, BigBear DID manipulate his affairs to get a FULL pension. He gave his money to well-off grandchildren and now milks taxpayer funds, and he ASSUMES everyone is an unethical as he is.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    5th Feb 2018
    5:36pm
    I just helped my struggling grandkids instead of being greedy and keeping it all when I didn't need it. Nothing unethical in helping out one's family.
    Captain
    5th Feb 2018
    7:02pm
    BigBear, you have mentioned before that you manipulated your assets to obtain the pension so why look down at others who did the same thing. You give the impression that what you did was good sense but think that others are not entitled to do as you did.

    I hope that you are able to live well on your pension without asking your children and grandchildren to prop up your lifestyle. Oh, by the way, do you enjoy those concessions that come with the pension?
    VeryCaringBigBear
    5th Feb 2018
    9:40pm
    My family pay all my living expenses so I can use my OAP to travel and enjoy myself.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    6th Feb 2018
    12:36pm
    Then you are committing a crime, BigBear. That is income that should be declared.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    6th Feb 2018
    12:43pm
    It is not income so doesn't have to be declared.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    8th Feb 2018
    8:10am
    It's income. And not declaring is immoral and dishonest.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    10th Feb 2018
    12:36pm
    So how does one classify it as income as I haven't earned it nor is it a return on an investment. It is the same as if a charity paid my bills for me.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    10th Feb 2018
    7:45pm
    It's return on investment. You gave money away to people knowing they would return the favour. That's return on investment.
    The system is wrong, but that doesn't make abusing it right. And it is disgusting to make comments that suggest either that they system is okay, or that those who suffer for doing what's right are to blame for their own hurt.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    11th Feb 2018
    4:41pm
    You are the only only one who thinks it is income.

    It is also disgusting to continue to try and make innocent people feel guilty.

    You may think the system is wrong but when they change it you are the first to complain badly.

    I hope they do change it so only those who have no other means of support benefit the most.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    12th Feb 2018
    5:38pm
    I hope they change it so cheats and manipulators are left with nothing and have to beg back the gifts they forced the taxpayer to finance.
    Andy
    5th Feb 2018
    1:02pm
    I have to laugh at the scardy cats that are not game to take a holiday overseas so they blame the people who do for breaking the country, there are people from all over the world living and holidaying in different countries than they were born and worked in so, in reality, it all pans out. this is what you should complain about when overseas our pension is $1.200 a month only last week a man from Norway living away from home complained that he was having trouble living on his pension of $3.000 a month why the hell aren't we getting that much
    Romeital
    5th Feb 2018
    1:31pm
    I agree with your point however you may find that Norway have very high taxes
    If it wasn’t so political then our taxes should probably be higher for example our GST is low compared to other countries even New Zealand as long as they are fairly levied to all of the community
    Rae
    5th Feb 2018
    1:55pm
    Our taxes when we worked were very high but that dimwitted Howard stuffed the revenue base up in his crazy attempts to stuff up Labor with little concern for the Australian people.

    Our revenue base is a disaster with poor tax takes, excessive privatisation of revenue raising assets and expensive contracts to foreign corporations.

    Norway has high taxes and then everything is covered. You simply don't have the inequality we suffer here with a few earning big incomes and others earning little but both groups having to pay for themselves in a quasi private/public chaotic mess.
    Cowboy Jim
    5th Feb 2018
    6:11pm
    Have been to Norway not long ago, forgot to ask them about pensions but the cost of living is rather high. My mother lives in Switzerland, her pension is about $A3200 a month but even at her age she is still in private health insurance. Everyone is a member and that is compulsory. There are also no commission homes and people who have never worked do not get a pension. They will be on a strict welfare controlled income with a "don't do this and don't do that" authority over them.
    Rae
    5th Feb 2018
    6:36pm
    That is fair enough Cowboy for people who have always been taxpayer supported.

    However those who have worked hard and paid taxes should be rewarded a bit. It couldn't be too hard to keep a record of taxes paid from income.

    I know business owners as well who never paid tax but then ended up claiming OAP as they had no superannuation or savings at retirement.

    They did however live the high life for decades at taxpayer expense.
    Flamingo
    5th Feb 2018
    1:12pm
    It’s very unfair because basically it means people are forced to try and find work at an older age I think the cuts are too severe this should be reviewed forthwith.
    Romeital
    5th Feb 2018
    1:22pm
    They do in fact for some people count part of the principle place of residences value
    If you rent you get over $200,000 more in assets before your pension is reduced and receive rent assistance
    So if your house is worth little more than this value then it is counted
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    5th Feb 2018
    1:26pm
    It's economically stupid, because tens of thousands are cruising and spending up big on home improvements because they can't get a decent return on their money. When it's gone, they will claim much larger pensions than they would otherwise have needed. It's also patently unfair, because it forces people who saved to forfeit the benefit of their savings and effectively gift them to people who didn't bother to save, or to taxpayers who are much wealthier - in many cases - than they are.
    Romeital
    5th Feb 2018
    1:34pm
    Exactly right all they have achieved is to shift the cost further ahead in years when it will become a greater cost to the nation
    Or maybe they are hoping we will all die before then
    VeryCaringBigBear
    5th Feb 2018
    1:59pm
    Most of these people organised their affairs just to get the Pensioner Concession Card so most would be happy now they have got it back. So there is no need for them to spend down their assets now.
    Sundays
    5th Feb 2018
    2:11pm
    I agree Rainey. Yes, the number of pensioners have dropped. The Govt thinks it can get a big pat on the back. Give it five years, when those who have missed out on the OAP, have used up their assets they will reapply for the age pension. Then
    there will be a big increase in the number of pensioners. However, this govt is only concerned with the short term.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    5th Feb 2018
    4:44pm
    Now they have their concession card back there is no reason to use up their assets.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    5th Feb 2018
    4:49pm
    What utter rubbish, BigBear. How the hell would you know what ''most of these people'' wanted? You know all 90,000 of them personally, to you? And many didn't get concession cards back because of minor fluctuations in asset values around the time of the change. Those who weren't on part pensions as at the date of change don't benefit from any concessions. Younger folk will see no point in saving and will reduce their savings and be more reliant on the pension. It's dumb and uneconomical. But of course you condone what your stupid LNP mates do. Like them, no care for the future - or for anyone besides yourself, it seems.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    5th Feb 2018
    5:45pm
    For what little pension they would get it is hardly worth worrying about let alone making an effort to spend more. Old habits are hard to break and the guilt for most people would make it near impossible to do so.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    6th Feb 2018
    6:23am
    There we go again! I did NOT post the above. Someone has hacked my account. JimD, are you doing this? You certainly have it in for me and have pulled out all stops to try to make me look bad.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    6th Feb 2018
    7:51am
    No Rainey you are posting in your dreams and you need help.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    6th Feb 2018
    11:06am
    Quite frankly Rainey I wouldn't be bothered and I enjoy my sleep too much to post at that time of day. My internet and phone go off when I go to bed and are turned on when I get up so no one can disturb my sleep.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    6th Feb 2018
    11:19am
    Another fraudulent post. I did not post at 11:04am. This is a disgusting individual committing fraud.

    5th Feb 2018
    2:11pm
    Those caught out by the change should simply spend the difference on Hine renovation and holidays or park some under the mattress
    Puglet
    5th Feb 2018
    4:10pm
    Seems to me that your recommendations for hiding assets from the government in order to receive money to which people are not entitled is little different from tax avoidance schemes designed to minimise taxable incomes by sending money to the Caymans - both are ethically and morally wrong. If everyone stopped trying to fleece our country there’d be more than enough money to provide support for those who can’t support themselves. I may be naive but I really do believe in a Fair Go for everyone. BTW I have chosen not to apply for a pension - wouldn’t get it unless I drew down on my super etc.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    5th Feb 2018
    4:52pm
    I agree Puglet. But unfortunately stupid politicians and bureaucrats are creating an environment in which the honest and ethical suffer too much, so increasingly there are less and less of them. People will cheat, because the cost of honesty is too high. The honest and ethical are constantly punished and the manipulators rewarded.

    I have also chosen not to apply for a pension. I continue to work instead, though well over 65. Happily, I love my work, and thanks to my super and a decent hourly rate, I'm able to keep to a few flexible hours each week and have plenty of leisure time. I'm lucky. But this change in policy was VERY VERY WRONG and everybody should be protesting loudly.
    Old Man
    5th Feb 2018
    5:44pm
    I'll thank you to know, Raphael, that my Hine hasn't been renovated nor is it in any need of renovation and I'm surprised that you would even mention such a thing in a public forum. :)
    VeryCaringBigBear
    5th Feb 2018
    6:58pm
    I advise anyone considering retirement with a lot of savings to leave work earlier than retirement age and use their savings to tick off their bucket list and enjoy themselves while they are healthy enough to do so.
    Anonymous
    6th Feb 2018
    11:06am
    That's a disgraceful and immoral thing to say BigBear. You are so VERY VERY WRONG and need to reform and become acceptably decent.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    6th Feb 2018
    11:16am
    Many people I know have left it too late and can't tick things off their bucket list due to health issues so it is very wrong not advice people to do things while they are healthier enough. If you have money why not retire early and travel the world as it's a lot more fun than salving away working for a boss and wasting your life away.

    I also advise people to take their money out off super if they only have small amounts too as they can earn income tax free in their own name and thus avoid the fees in super.
    Mad as hell
    5th Feb 2018
    2:38pm
    LNP and Greens have stolen entitlements from pensioners. LNP and Greens are not the pensioners friends.
    Puglet
    5th Feb 2018
    3:47pm
    My opinions about which Australians ‘deserve’ or don’t ’deserve’ pensions differ from those of some posters. I prefer the Scandinavian and French schemes where every citizen automatically receives the aged pension irrespective of entitlement. In France the generous pensions recognise the contribution citizens have made to their country during their life time. Those who can afford it supplement their income with private or employer based schemes. The exact income a person receives depends on how much and for many years they have contributed to the government scheme. Mothers with children receive an extra 2 years’ of income per child to account for the years they were out of the workforce because of their child care. The downside is of course these countries are ‘high taxing’. However older people live in dignified comfort. If the want to spen their money on a cruise that’s their choice. There is also no CentreLink Assets’ test or robo-debt collectors - must save billions. I’ve just come from Scandavia and it’s clear that as politics moves to the far right, the needs and the rights of the vulnerable are increasingly threatened. Trumpian politics are alive and well in Europe.
    Rae
    5th Feb 2018
    4:54pm
    Yes Puglet but even the USA gives a universal pension to all it's retirees. Most OECD countries do. There is something very wrong with Australia. It is not the country of the fair go.

    The far right has had nearly 100 years to implement the current fascist ideals. Most of Europe learnt their lesson the last time around.
    floss
    5th Feb 2018
    3:49pm
    I can wait till the next election as this Federal Government is so arrogant to say their policy was crap and they will change it.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    5th Feb 2018
    3:57pm
    You think a Labor government will be more generous? Fort hose on the full pension it is a possibility but not for those with other assets.
    Old Man
    5th Feb 2018
    4:46pm
    This is starting to look like politics of envy in reverse. Whereas Labor seems to always be trying to tear down the tall poppies and the Libs are supposed to be looking after the rich, here we have people with assets that can be converted to cash being denied a pension which is supposed to be a safety net. We're not talking about how Pollies should try and live off the meagre pension, we're talking about people whose assets exceed $800,000 and this figure excludes the family home.

    Surely those people should be ineligible for the age pension until they divest themselves of those assets which preclude them from getting an age pension or part thereof. I would love to be in that position but, alas, we have to rely on the fortnightly addition to our account. Why is this forum trying to protect those who, compared to most pensioners, are "rich".
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    5th Feb 2018
    4:58pm
    Why, Old Man? If someone saves $100,000, should they have to give it to someone who didn't? That's the effect of this legislation. The fellow who went without holidays and restaurant dinners is effectively forced to give his savings to the fellow who enjoyed those luxuries.

    The return on $800,000 is generally LESS than the aged pension, so there is no benefit to saving. You are worse off for having gone without luxuries. Might as well live it up and put your hand out for taxpayer funds. Then there's less to go around those in real need. That's NOT smart. You are taking a very simplistic view that doesn't factor in the realities of current economic conditions. Sure, $800,000 + the family home sounds like a lot, but so does the amount pensioners are given if you quote it as a lump sum. Homeowner couple X with $250,000 in the bank is given about $1 million in handouts from the taxpayer over 30 years in retirement, PLUS gets everything cheaper. Homeowner Y, who struggled to save $850,000, is given NOTHING and pays more for everything, Do you really think that's reasonable? Is it going to encourage younger folk to save and try to fund their own retirement?
    Cowboy Jim
    5th Feb 2018
    5:02pm
    Well Old Man - some people do exactly what you suggest: divest themselves of assets by going on cruises etc. and then they are criticized in this forum for spending their own money. What is the difference of people in old age spending some money and the have nots doing away with all their earnings in the gaming venues and pubs during their earlier time. Thrift should not be punished and stupidity rewarded unless you really want a Bogan country in the future.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    5th Feb 2018
    5:30pm
    Rainey those with $800.000 are far better off than those with $250,000 as they not only have the earnings on the capital but the capital itself to spend.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    5th Feb 2018
    5:30pm
    We are already a country full of bogans.
    Old Man
    5th Feb 2018
    5:40pm
    I don't understand your logic Rainey. How does someone who has saved money have to give it to someone who didn't? $800,000 is a lot and allows a couple to draw just over $1000 per fortnight over 30 years. This figure doesn't allow for any interest earned and, more importantly, doesn'y allow for the amount of age pension which will kick in once the balance drops below the threshold.

    Gee Cowboy Jim, I know a lot of nice, decent people who like to go to have a friendly drink at their local pub and, occasionally, a go at the pokies. I would never call them Bogans, as they don't fit that description at all. I am a regular in this forum and I have not seen anyone criticised for spending money to try and get the pension or the Health Care Card.
    Rae
    5th Feb 2018
    6:43pm
    Why would you save $800 000 to live on $26 000 a year with no concessions when you can not save and receive a couple's pension of $33 000 with concessions. It makes no financial sense.

    Better to spend that $800 000 during your younger life having a great time.

    Fortunately the young I know are doing just that. Travelling and enjoying life while young as there is no incentive to save for yourself unless you earn hundreds of thousands a year.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    5th Feb 2018
    9:21pm
    So, Old Man, you think if X saves $800,000, he should live on $26,000 a year while Y who didn't save anything receives $33,000 a year and pays less for everything? Sorry, I don't buy that argument at all.

    Yes, X IS giving his money away - forced to - because he's having to draw on his savings to compensate for not receiving the tax-funded pension that those who save less are receiving. So ultimately, he is losing the benefit of his savings. They SHOULD be his to spend on extras or to keep generating additional income, but no, he has to drain them until they reduce low enough for him to get the benefits Y is getting without spending his lesser amount of capital.

    Try doing some math for goodness sake. Y gets $33,000 a year, possibly some $4000 in concessions and benefits, and perhaps $5000 a year return on his $250,000. Nice total of about $42,000 a year, and he doesn't touch his savings.

    X gets maybe $25500 a year return, if he's lucky, on his $850,000, so has to draw $16500 from savings to have the same standard of living as Y. He is losing the benefit of his extra savings, because if he didn't have it, he'd get a pension and benefits. And the taxpayer is saving $16500 that isn't being given to X, so YES, he's being forced to GIFT HIS SAVINGS TO OTHERS.

    I don't see how anyone can justify this nonsense. The assets test is just plain WRONG. Test income if you like, but punishing people for saving is never going to help the national economy. And it hurts the least advantaged most, because the fellow who can get 7% on his $850,000 is earning a very nice income WITHOUT touching his savings, but the less well educated, who have no access to reliable advisers, suffer. In a society where people CLAIM to want to help those who need help most, that's also WRONG.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    5th Feb 2018
    9:24pm
    As Rae says, why would you save to live on $26,000 a year when you can cruise the world or give your money away to children and grandchildren and have a higher income, courtesy of the taxpayer?

    Surely nobody is dumb enough to think it's good for the nation to create a situation like this, where people are better off being dependant in old age? (Well, yes, it seems some are dumb enough to think that! Otherwise this IDIOTIC policy would never have passed.)
    VeryCaringBigBear
    5th Feb 2018
    9:36pm
    Rainey you calculations don't take into account that the $800,000 was saved for retirement and so can be actually spent in retirement. If that people lives for 20 years he has another $40,000 to spend every year. He can't spend it when he is six foot under.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    6th Feb 2018
    6:20am
    Somebody is making mischief here, because I did NOT make the above one-line post. Someone has somehow posted under my user name.

    However, BigBear, you ARE wrong, because if the person DIDN'T save that money, he'd still have it. He'd get more handouts from the taxpayer. Maybe he had a valid reason for saving it to leave to a needy heir such as a disabled grandchild. Maybe he saved it to fund lavish aged care in his last years. He has a RIGHT to use it for whatever he saved it for. It is simply WRONG and OUTRIGHT THEFT to deny someone a benefit others receive simply because he was frugal and put money aside for some future need.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    6th Feb 2018
    7:59am
    If a person saved it to give to his disabled grand child then why hasn't he already given it to them instead of watching themselves? You also get same room in a nursing home no matter how much money you have. Only difference is if you have lots of money you pay heaps for your bond and if you have nothing you pay nothing. Rooms are same and side by side with same everything.

    So you need to take the $800,000 into your calculations as without it you are not showing the full picture.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    6th Feb 2018
    8:48am
    If the $800,000 was in a super pension and earning 5% then they would be earning $40,000 tax free.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    6th Feb 2018
    11:25am
    And they would be no better off than a pensioner - and worse off than many - after years of going without all the luxuries the pensioner enjoyed. It's WRONG, and you can't make it right with your bullying BigBear.

    There are many valid reasons not to pass money to a disabled grandson early. If he's a minor, it might compromise his parents' entitlements to financial help.

    As for nursing homes, you are WRONG WRONG WRONG. There are many excellent homes that you can only get into if you can afford the price. A friend bought a special disability-friendly unit and hired two nurses, a cook and a cleaner. You can do that if you have money - but not if it's STOLEN from you by a stinking vile government supported by greedy people.
    Cowboy Jim
    5th Feb 2018
    4:55pm
    @ H S - do read the tables again when you state that the principal residence is exempt from the asset test. With home ownership you sacrifice other assets to the tune of $200'000. Very easily changed in the future and it could become $400'000 - would not even have to be legislated. I sometimes wonder why people cannot read simple Centrelink tables.
    srs21
    5th Feb 2018
    6:24pm
    Back in ‘42, Chifley started up a Fund ....National Pension. 7% of the peoples income tax was automatically placed in this fund to be used by the retirees and unemployed. Not as Welfare because it was our own money, working for us. Within a couple of years there was over100,000 pounds, so much it surprised them all. Malcom Fraser increased it to 7.5%.Imagine the amount we’ve got today! But we haven’t got it because Howard changed it to Futures Fund which is used by senior bureaucrats and politicians.now they are dishing out money all the while whinging about the cost of pensions
    Rae
    5th Feb 2018
    6:46pm
    Howard sold out to the far right. Not sure if he realised or was very naive. Chifley actually cared about Australians. No modern PM has.
    hannan
    5th Feb 2018
    6:46pm
    The AARP Foundation publication Reverse Mortgage Loans: Borrowing Against Your Home is an an easy-to-understand guide for older adults who are considering such a mortgage refinance for their home (PDF). http://sdfdsfdzss.com.au sdfsdf
    VeryCaringBigBear
    5th Feb 2018
    6:59pm
    Reverse mortgage loans are interest only loan on steroids.
    Rae
    6th Feb 2018
    7:19am
    Better to sell the home and buy something cheaper taking the money you need out. Compound interest is a killer n retirement. Now if it was the 1.05% interest you get it would still be bad but the rates they actually charge will take your house eventually.

    Can anyone else see a conspiracy here to steal the homes of ordinary people for the top wealthy income earners?

    Reverse mortgage and excessive aged care bonds. What next?
    VeryCaringBigBear
    6th Feb 2018
    8:06am
    Excessive age care bonds are wrong as they require the same of an exempt asset which in many cases means less OAP as well.

    I have no intension of spending my days playing Bingo in God's waiting room waiting for my number to be called.
    thommo
    5th Feb 2018
    9:11pm
    When this govt changed the assets test as from 1.1.17, Morrison said that those on the full age pension would get an extra $15 per week. Well that was another load of BS, as was Abbott's promise at the 2013 election that there would be no changes to the pension. Another load of BS and another broken promise.
    Now you say that 90,000 part age pensioners have lost their pension this year. Well I'am surprised it isn't more, but the fact is that these retirees retired on the assumption that they would get the part age pension, which was set within the Centrelink rules when they planned their retirement.
    But in the 2015 budget, Abbott and Morrison pulled the rug from under them, and now their retirement plans are in ruins, which is unforgivable.
    These retirees (and others who planned their retirement later based on the legitimate criteria at the time) will never forgive or forget what this government has done to them (and labor is no better), and they will be out with a bat in each hand when it comes time for the next election.
    They won't miss this LNP govt this time.
    And by the way, this one of the reasons why there is a move to the Calithumpian parties in protest against the two main political parties for not looking after Australian society with decent social justice policies. This is not Trump's America..where the right wing tea party rules the roost.
    Lest we forget and goodbye LNP.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    5th Feb 2018
    9:37pm
    Therefore we will still have the LNP running the country after next election.
    Cowboy Jim
    5th Feb 2018
    9:50pm
    thommo - agree with you in many ways but it was Labor that made us work to 67 and people also have made plans for future retirement at 65; as you said Labor is no better - so who do we vote for?
    Seadove
    6th Feb 2018
    12:24am
    Agree with you thommo and the way around the changes every government wants to make to superannuation is to make it start 1 July each year only with new people coming in to the system. Bit late for us who have already retired to adjust accordingly but that's too logical for Morrison and Cormann to bring in, they just want to hit everyone of us and dare to say it's our own fault we aren't rich enough to live on our own money. Quite frankly I'm sick of all the bullshit that comes out of Canberra by all the parties.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    6th Feb 2018
    8:52am
    What rubbis if a couple has $800,000 they ate far from having their retirement in ruins. iMany other OAPs would love to retire wwith that sort of money.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    6th Feb 2018
    10:38am
    They have their retirement PLANS in ruins, BB, because they planned according to promises made while they were working. It is irrelevant how much someone has. It's THEIR PLANS AND NEEDS that is relevant, and you can't judge that and neither can anyone else here. This COMMUNIST attitude that just because some are struggling, others who saved better should be persecuted is WRONG and it will cause major economic damage to the nation.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    6th Feb 2018
    11:00am
    Rubbish Rainey they just had it way too good and now things have been rectified they simply don't like it.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    6th Feb 2018
    11:21am
    They had what they EARNED BigBear. Now they are being robbed to give to lazy people and cheats. Of course they don't like it. They earned that money, paid tax on it, lived frugally to save it, and are now having it STOLEN to give to people less deserving - like you!
    VeryCaringBigBear
    7th Feb 2018
    10:02am
    So then following on anyone that is a self funded retiree is also having their money stolen (same as not getting the OAP) to give it to more deserving people.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    8th Feb 2018
    12:58pm
    It depends on their circumstances, BigBear. Some have ample to get far more income than they could ever reasonably need and therefore don't have to dip into savings to benefit others. If they were lucky enough to acquire those assets with the help of massive tax concessions, then NO, they are NOT having their money stolen. They got their share of the nation's pie in other ways, earlier in life.

    If, on the other hand, their savings were acquired without huge tax benefits, then YES, they probably are having their money stolen. Though it isn't nearly so bad for those who have enough to live without sacrificing what they saved for.

    What we need is an overhaul of the OAP system to make it FAIR and SENSIBLE, as well as economically sustainable. Unfortunately politicians are too dumb or too corrupt to achieve that, and dumb LNP supporters are too unintelligent or too selfish to endorse demands for reform.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    10th Feb 2018
    12:41pm
    Since I acquired my wealth without any tax benefits then if I had helped my family my money would have Bern stolen to help others. Gee I'm glad I didn't have my money stolen to help other people who may or may not need help. I don't know them or there circumstances so who knows if they needed help. My family certainly did need hel.p..
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    10th Feb 2018
    7:56pm
    If your family needed help, the Government would have provided it. They didn't. And if you were decent and ethical, you wouldn't boast about what you did and condemn others. You would support objection to unfairness and demands for reform of the system to be fair. But no, you abuse those who complain that they are suffering for being hard working and honest. That's SICK.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    11th Feb 2018
    4:31pm
    So the government was able to help others with any help they could have given my family. Sounds good to me.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    12th Feb 2018
    5:40pm
    No. The government is forced to give you help you DID NOT NEED OR QUALIFY FOR because you chose to abuse the public purse and give money to people who neither needed nor qualified for it.
    MICK
    6th Feb 2018
    2:58am
    Where else in the western world are peoples pensions under attack? Only in Australia and only under a Coalition government.
    WE NEED A NEW GOVERNMENT. Any government...as long as it is not a Coalition one.
    Captain
    6th Feb 2018
    1:49pm
    Mick, as long as people do not vote for the weak-kneed and weak-brained Greens.
    Linda
    6th Feb 2018
    9:59pm
    Folks in the United States have basically no idea what might happen in the political climate there. There is a huge move to take away the Social Security program that was started during Roosevelt's term as President. That scheme was and has always been a contributory scheme. Money taken out of each pay check that was put into that fund. If you made more then you paid more in. Then at retirement, according to how long you worked, a set amount was determined and paid each month to the person who contributed. It was very sustainable until congress decided to play fancy accounting and basically raided the funds to pay debt. Now there is a move to move to a system more like the one in Australia. They want to call it a benefit, when in fact it was designed to be something earned and paid for by each contributor. Many folks who contributed in, did not make it to retirement age and those funds also helped make a very big balance in the fund. The political folks who are not part of that because they are federal employees, have a different system. The political folks in congress then have felt free to dip into these funds that were supposed to be set aside for a guaranteed income in retirement. The amount was never very large, about 15,000 pa these days.

    It looks like a trend in liberal governments around the world to begin to downgrade the incomes of the citizens by changing the rules.

    We can only do something about this if we unite and speak with one voice. Changing the rules after one is retired and has made their plans according to the rules and promises seems very very poor governance. To top things off the libs keep touting that lie that they are the best managers of the economy. They certainly are not. These cuts and changes are part of the proof.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    8th Feb 2018
    1:02pm
    You are so right, Linda, but sadly we can't speak with one voice because so many are utterly selfish. On the one hand, we have the rich ''I'm okay Jack, stuff you'' crowd wishing hurt on the less affluent, and on the other we have the struggling pensioners looking green-eyed and resentfully at those who have a little more and claiming it should be taken away - unwilling to recognize that those who worked hard and saved well are ENTITLED to a higher standard of retirement living.

    We all feel very sorry for those who genuinely couldn't acquire savings for a comfortable retirement, but they are a small minority. The majority of the ''have nothing'' crowd were wasteful. And it's these people - not the real battlers - who resent others having more than them and refuse to support calls for fair reform.

    It just can't happen until people stop thinking solely of themselves and start thinking of what's good the nation and its people.
    Rae
    9th Feb 2018
    7:35am
    Historically this happens after periods of plenty. Gradually the greedy take it all.

    Then there is a Depression and someone like Roosevelt has to create a New Deal and share it out again to get the cash flowing.
    He taxed the top Elites 90% before he stopped the chaos that was the 1930s.

    People are basically dumb and dumber and refuse to learn from history, insisting on learning from experience and doing the same thing over and over. Einstein was right about that for sure.

    America has slowly rising hourly wages but falling hours worked like here and in the UK.Money is tight as fr all but the wealthy.
    We are all going down the question is only about the timing.

    I'm saving ready for the time soon when the wallets are finally empty all over and demand collapses.

    Helping my family is the priority. As far as fair reform goes Rainey the next liquidity crisis will be a doozy and those not ready with a bit of cash saved will have to hope the Charities can help them.

    Rainey you are trying to change human nature. You can't.
    Most people will live day to day concerned with their short term needs and little else. People cannot see consequences and get caught up in beliefs and pettiness.

    And yes the squanderers will always blame the savers and try to take what they have accumulated. The Grasshopper and the Ant.

    This Nation has been sold out bit by bit by successive Governments for decades. I doubt we will stop the rot anytime soon.

    How can you really expect governments that have sold all the Nations assets at rock bottom prices and destroyed the revenue base to care about conservative savers? The never will.
    We are just another source of money to access and squander.

    You've just stated the obvious. Relax a little. You can't save the world or people from their karma.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    9th Feb 2018
    11:17am
    I agree with you, Rae. You are wise, and also courteous and respectful. I realise I can't change human nature, but I can keep responding to nasty people who boast about manipulating the system and repeatedly insult those who choose to be more ethical, as well as those who never had the opportunity to manipulate and are now struggling on an inadequate income.

    I am very fortunate, at present. I have both cash reserves and investment assets and an income from ongoing casual work that I love doing. I don't know how long that will last, but for now it's all good, though there are also some very high health costs to contend with.

    I just can't help feeling disturbed when I see people making arrogant and cruel remarks, wishing hurt and/or unfairness on others and justifying policies that are clearly wrong.

    As a group, senior Australians have enormous power, but we can't exercise that power because of selfish, self-serving people. We should all be uniting to demand a better deal for all seniors - a total overhaul of a seriously flawed system that isn't serving many people well at all really. But sadly, some of those who have very little are too consumed with envy to support fair reform, and those who have more than enough are too arrogant and selfish to care about anyone but themselves.

    You are right. We don't learn from history. And as a result, this nation is headed for a huge disaster. Society is falling apart, economically and morally. The big question is, how much lower can we sink before we hit bottom?
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    6th Feb 2018
    6:28am
    Somebody is posting under my user name and making abusive comments. The comments above posted around 1am on 6th Feb were NOT posted by me. YLC needs to sort out what is going on here.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    6th Feb 2018
    8:53am
    Well Rainey they sound like your comments to me.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    6th Feb 2018
    9:12am
    They are NOT, BigBear, but I know who is doing it.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    6th Feb 2018
    10:58am
    Rubbish Rainey only you would write such things about me.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    6th Feb 2018
    11:16am
    BigBear, you are a very nasty person. I said I didn't make those posts and I did not. Now the criminal has changed his name to my new name.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    6th Feb 2018
    6:30am
    The LNP has very cleverly set up a sting to make Labor look bad again. The consequences of this very damaging change will be a massive rise in the future cost of the aged pension. But no doubt by the time the increase kicks in, the LNP will have been booted out, and then they'll blame Labor for ''poor economic management''. As many times before, it will have been LNP policy that caused the budget blowout, but because they implement policy that will impose future costs - and often that deceptively appears to create savings in the short term - they claim to be ''economically responsible''. And clearly they fool a lot of the people a lot of the time.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    6th Feb 2018
    7:45am
    I disagree as with less people on the OAP it is costing the government less and going forward super will start to kick in and have a greater effect on the budget than the few that spend down their wealth to get the OAP. Many are too set in their ways and will find they feel so guilty about spending money they simply won't be able to do it anyway.

    Your actions alone Rainey suggest to me you are one of those who would feel guilty about wasting their hard earned wealth.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    6th Feb 2018
    7:46am
    If the stock markets keep falling like they have in last couple of days then they won't have to even spend it.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    6th Feb 2018
    9:12am
    No wonder they are falling, with the idiot politicians the world over making dumb policies. Goodness, tax cuts for wealthy corporations have been conclusively proven to do nothing to help economic growth, but the fools keep doing it!
    VeryCaringBigBear
    6th Feb 2018
    11:02am
    So you want to see a world recession where the poor get hurt the most. That doesn't sound like you at all.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    6th Feb 2018
    11:15am
    We ARE seeing a world recession, BB. I want it to STOP. I want sensible policies designed to build economic strength, but the greedy are just too self-obsessed to do anything for the common good and the ''I'm alright Jack, stuff you'' crowd keep voting for bad policies,
    VeryCaringBigBear
    6th Feb 2018
    11:21am
    Gee after being in NZ I'd say they are booming and the US is also booming as well as a lot of Europe. Sydney is as busy as usually and the crane index says Sydney is still booming too. We are also booming around where I live which I don't like. You must live in one of those out of the way country towns that has nothing to offer tourists.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    6th Feb 2018
    12:33pm
    The wealthy are booming. Do some study, BigBear. The boom is not extending to ordinary wage earners or the disadvantaged. We are seeing the highest levels and most rapid growth of inequity in centuries. The US is hideous. The poverty there is shocking. Likewise in the UK. It is NOT a boom when it is restricted to benefiting only the wealthy sector.
    Linda
    6th Feb 2018
    10:14pm
    Interesting comments. The current run away real estate and rental costs make things impossible for those who don't own homes. Who can these days by a house or even a flat for 200,000? There is something wrong with that figure.

    Our young folks can't get into the real estate market because the costs are too high in many places. The high rent takes what they earn, so saving is often just not possible. It looks like the young and the old are being mistreated and some are being forced into being homeless. This is tragic.

    For some, maybe the old age pension or part pension does not matter that much but one needs a good bit of reserves in this poor return time in order to enjoy the basic things of life.

    We very much need a gifted statesman with better solutions. It seems out of balance that at a time when the cost of living is rising, that the income for retired people has changed, both in terms of income from investments and those who quality for some OAP. We must also remember that those on low incomes pay 10 percent tax on most everything they buy. Remember those on the low incomes lose 10 percent of what they get which is already not that much.

    I don't see any problem at all with someone going on a cruise, maybe they don't go out to dinner or dont' buy expensive cars or drinks. It seems small to me, for anyone to point at another and question their decisions and choices about how they spend their money in retirement. It seems gross to me.

    If our home needs maintenance or modifications for safety, which most do for retired people then they need some money to pay for that. That kind of thing helps the economy and keeps those who are employed in jobs. There is value in that.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    7th Feb 2018
    9:58am
    I agree Linda and that's why I gave the money I didn't need to my grandkids to buy houses instead of hanging on to it and getting a poor return. It gave them the leg up they needed and they now pay my living expenses so I can use my OAP to do what I want to do.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    7th Feb 2018
    5:18pm
    But if everyone did as you did, BigBear, there would be nothing left for the genuinely needy and the nation would be bankrupt. Pensions were NOT intended to enable wealthy people to give them money to family and then bludge on the taxpayer. And the same person who does this then condemns those who suffer unfair deprivation for having saved, calling them ''greedy'' and saying they have ''had it too good for too long''. Seems you condone your own greed, but nobody else is entitled to have anything - no matter how hard they work and save for it. You condone unethical behaviour that robs the nation - but not fair complaint about being robbed. That's hypocritical in the extreme, and extraordinarily self-serving.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    7th Feb 2018
    5:55pm
    On one hand you say we can afford to pay twice as much OAP and on the other hand you say if everyone did what I did the nation would be bankrupt.

    Light bulb moment there are more people of retirement age on the full OAP then there are on part pension or no pension.

    The only deduction is therefore we simply can't afford to pay twice as much OAP as we would be well and truly bankrupt.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    8th Feb 2018
    12:52pm
    BigBear, we CAN AFFORD to pay twice as much in OAP and that would NOT bankrupt the nation IF the government had the integrity to tax properly. The problem isn't spending. It's REVENUE. You can't run a nation without making people pay their share. It's that simple. And given that the government WON'T make people pay their share, YES, everyone manipulating dishonestly the way you do WOUILD mean there was nothing for the genuinely needy.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    12th Feb 2018
    7:45am
    According to Centrelink I'm classified as needy. I have little in the way of assets and income.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    13th Feb 2018
    10:03am
    And that's what's wrong with the current system. There is no capacity to correctly assess need or to accurately classify people as ''needy''. It's a flawed system that invites manipulation by the unethical, and that is being widely exploited by the likes of you, BigBear - to the detriment of the honest and ethical and the genuinely needy.
    Ausdigga
    6th Feb 2018
    8:15am
    It looks like OG is morphing into GG !!
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    6th Feb 2018
    9:17am
    I've had a response from YLC staff. It seems someone has registered themselves with my user name. They say it's ''coincidence'', but it certainly is NOT. And I'm fairly sure I know who it is. These fraudulent posts have only just started, and the person making them is trying very hard to make me look as bad as he possibly can.

    Something SERIOUSLY wrong when someone can register the same name as another member! No responsible developer sets a community up that way. They always tell you the name is in use and you have to choose another.

    Anyway, I guess I have to change my user name. Clearly the disgusting person doing this is determined to try to force me to leave the community. Won't happen. But any further posts from ''Rainey'' are NOT MINE AND NOTHING TO DO WITH ME. Most likely JimD, I'm guessing, given his behaviour to date.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    6th Feb 2018
    11:01am
    Sounds like a cop out to me Rainey.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    6th Feb 2018
    11:13am
    Well, the mischief-maker is at it again. Now stolen my new user name. YLC needs to stop this.

    The post at 11:11am WAS NOT MADE BY ME.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    6th Feb 2018
    11:17am
    As I am not nasty by nature you can rule me out. I certainly don't use such awful words as you do Rainey.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    6th Feb 2018
    12:34pm
    I didn't think it was you, BigBear. The fraudster accused you, no doubt to deflect. I suspect JimD, and I still think it likely.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    6th Feb 2018
    12:34pm
    YLC have decided to take the issue seriously now. They are now satisfied the conduct was malicious.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    6th Feb 2018
    4:03pm
    I guess you have to ask yourself the question why did they do it?

    Can I suggest a little more tolerance to other people's posts and particularly what they have to say.

    eg Most people would find the language you direct towards me as disgusting.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    6th Feb 2018
    6:22pm
    I know why they did it BigBear, and it had nothing to do with my tolerance or lack thereof. The person concerned was upset because he posted defamatory content after I disagreed with his opinion, and it was removed.

    Show more tolerance for people who wish hurt on others and constantly denigrate anyone who expresses concern about the difficulties some suffer, then boasts about being unethical and claiming benefits he doesn't need. No way! Sorry.
    floss
    6th Feb 2018
    6:49pm
    Sorry to see your problem as you appear to be a good caring person Rainey.Your comments are spot on nearly all the time.
    Linda
    6th Feb 2018
    10:16pm
    I agree floss.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    7th Feb 2018
    5:13pm
    Thank you, floss and Linda. You are very kind to say so.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    7th Feb 2018
    5:48pm
    I disagree floss as a caring person would not used the language they do towards me or anyone else. Unfortunately what goes around comes back and haunts you.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    8th Feb 2018
    8:14am
    BigBear, nobody says anything unpleasant or negative to you or about you that isn't richly deserved. Actually, it's mild compared to what you deserve. Sadly, you are a very UNCARING and UNPLEASANT. Your posts portray a clearly arrogant, greedy and self-serving individual who makes baseless claims of superiority and scorns and wishes hurt on good, honest, hard working people who behave ethically and morally and suffer wrongly for doing so.

    I'm sorry if that offends, but it's the way it is. And your posts make no attempt to hide your unpleasant attitude to others. In fact, they flaunt an attitude that is grossly offensive and hurtful. And then you have the disgusting gall to claim that a nasty attack on someone perpetrated by an act of outright fraud is ''hilarious''. That's sick!
    Old Geezer
    8th Feb 2018
    5:51pm
    No one has the right to abuse anyone especially if they simply don't agree with them.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    12th Feb 2018
    5:36pm
    Then stop abusing, OG. You are among the worst here.
    Blossom
    6th Feb 2018
    11:23pm
    Exactly that Ian. No way can you get 3.25%. One of the Banks in Adealaide is offering a special interest rate at the moment for a temporary deal of 2.75%
    VeryCaringBigBear
    7th Feb 2018
    10:11am
    Yes you can easily earn 3.25% if you invest your money well. Centrelink doesn't want you to leave in it poor performing bank interest investments that rarely make money after inflation and tax.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    7th Feb 2018
    5:12pm
    If Centrelink wants people to invest better, it should tell them how - not punish them for not knowing. Only disgusting selfish scumbags are content to see people hurt because they aren't able to find suitable higher returning investments. If Centrelink's aim was as you claim, BigBear (and we all know that's garbage!) they only have to publish the information and everyone would flock.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    7th Feb 2018
    5:45pm
    Well that's what Justin Bolt from Centrelink tells everyone on Sky Business and in other media. He also if you want to know how to invest better then see your financial advisor. Sounds like good advice that anyone could take advantage of to me.

    Remember Centrelink can't like I can't tell people how to invest their money without knowing their client and having appropriate licences.

    Therefore if someone can earn 5% and they are deemed at 3.25% then they are doing the right thing and investing for the future. Anyone not getting the deeming rate or better is just parking their money not investing it.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    7th Feb 2018
    5:46pm
    Please refer to me as CaringBigBear as that is my proper name.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    8th Feb 2018
    7:43am
    I will never refer to you as ''Caring''. BigBear, because you are anything but. You are the most UNCARING and UNLIKEABLE person on this forum. Your posts reflect a degree of arrogance and contempt for others that is hideous, not to mention extreme selfishness and greed. Sorry if that offends, but it's just a fact. You boast about having ripped off the system, in a way that the general public never intended should be allowed or condoned - to pass money to your family and then take money from the public purse that taxpayers contribute for the purpose of helping those in genuine need. And then you denigrate and wish hurt on people who work hard and save well and are honest, claiming they ''had it too good for too long'' (clearly you did!) and have no right to enjoy the lifestyle they worked so hard to achieve.

    As to Centrelink giving advice, WHAT UTTER RUBBISH! If there are ways to safely get 3% or more interest, Centrelink can publish that information. And for that matter, so can you, as long as it's a statement that does not purport to give financial advice. All it takes is a qualifier. As a matter of fact, you DID advise people about certain types of saving accounts.

    There is only one reason for withholding information about where to get a higher interest rate, and that is a desire to ensure the privileged retain their superior status and the under-privileged remain so. And there's only one reason for an unrealistic deeming rate, and that is to make life harder for the under-privileged and reduce the cost of welfare - and thus the tax the greedy privileged have to pay. Well, actually maybe there's another reason. So the stinking nasty greedy privileged, like the person here who calls himself ''CaringBigBear'' but certainly isn't, can look down their noses at others and THINK they are better than them.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    8th Feb 2018
    8:08am
    And ''see your financial adviser'' sounds like TERRIBLE advice to me, because 90% or more of them are either totally useless or have vested interests and give very bad advice. Finding a good one is like finding a spec of gold on a sandy beach.
    Old Geezer
    8th Feb 2018
    3:10pm
    Seeing a financial advisor is far better than taking advice from someone at the local pub. Unfortunately the law no longer allows people to give individuals financial advice unless they know their client and are qualified to do so.

    Just because you have had one or two bad experiences with financial advisors doesn't mean they are useless. Most people only have bad experiences because they fail to follow proper advice.

    Find a financial advisor that charges you a fee and rebates back all commissions and you have a very good chance of getting a good one.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    8th Feb 2018
    4:48pm
    What rubbish! I'll say it again, and I know many here agree. At least 90% of financial advisers are useless. I know of one who charged $750 per consultation and claimed total independence. Anyone following his advice would have lost hundreds of thousands very quickly. Very few are really independent, even if they appear to be. They are attached to major advisory entities and get their information from them.
    Old Geezer
    8th Feb 2018
    5:44pm
    Until I could manage my money myself I invested with the help of advisors. I would not be nearly as wealthy today if it hadn't been for their guidance in my early years of investing. Thank goodness for their guidance.
    Old Geezer
    8th Feb 2018
    5:47pm
    Even today I still tap into the expertise of financial advisors. I was told of the asset changes well before they were announced by the government. I was even asked if I thought they were a good idea.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    10th Feb 2018
    7:58pm
    Then you are very privileged to have found a good advisor, and you should stop abusing and denigrating those who can't and have some humanity and decency. Support calls for pension reform to treat the less advantaged more respectfully, instead of gloating about your good fortune and bullying and abusing those who don't have the same advantages.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    11th Feb 2018
    4:23pm
    Actually it was an investment advisor who told me to retire early, travel while I was able and help my family out if I had anything left. Best advice I have ever had from anyone.

    I have no problem with pension reform and being on a full OAP I see more positives than negatives in it for people like me.

    Just remember any pension reform is only going to come with a new lot of loopholes that those in the know will exploit.
    Justsane
    7th Feb 2018
    5:25pm
    Sorry to be pedantic, but there is no 31st June.
    Old Geezer
    8th Feb 2018
    10:46am
    All we have is more people who don't qualify for the OAP due the change in asset test. This change was long over due as a couple with over $1.2 million in assets plus a home should not have been given the OAP in the first place.

    Sure in the current low interest environment they may now be only getting as much as the OAP if invested in poorly preforming cash investments but in times of high interest rates I didn't hear them complain about earning too much.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    8th Feb 2018
    12:48pm
    People with over $1.2 million in assets plus a home NEVER GOT THE OAP, dunce!

    Those with $820,000 SHOULD get the OAP if their returns on investment are not very much higher than the OAP + benefits. They are ENTITLED to the benefit of their hard work and saving.

    And of course they didn't complain when interest rates were higher. Nor would they if they rose. They have a right to expect a return that significantly exceeds that of people who rely on the taxpayer for their retirement income. If return rates are low, that means the assets test SHOULD be adjusted higher - or, more sensibly, abolished in favour of a sensibly structured income/deemed income test that INCLUDES the family home, but recognizes realistic home values and the right of those who struggled to buy a home to enjoy it in their autumn and winter years.
    Old Geezer
    8th Feb 2018
    2:59pm
    I see things haven't changed in fact I'd say you have only got worse with your abusing of me Rainey.

    It's about time the moderators of this forum did there job and put a stop to all this unnecessary abusing of people.

    I certainly wouldn't put up with it from any of my family and this site is getting as bad as other social media forum where people think it is OK to abuse people.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    8th Feb 2018
    3:04pm
    I agree with Old Geezer the abuse of others should not be tolerated in this forum.
    Old Geezer
    8th Feb 2018
    3:29pm
    Abusing people is a very childish act. Just because one disagrees it does not give them the right to abuse someone.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    8th Feb 2018
    4:45pm
    I am not abusing anyone. I'm simply stating facts. It's the arrogant people who seek to deny people fairness and empathy who are abusive - i.e. Old Geezer and BigBear.
    Old Geezer
    8th Feb 2018
    5:49pm
    Wrong Rainey if you don't agree with what someone says then you abuse them like a spoilt child who can't have a lollipop.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    10th Feb 2018
    7:53pm
    You need to learn what ''abuse'' is, OG. YOU are abusive, as is BigBear. I just stated facts.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    8th Feb 2018
    12:44pm
    Here's another example of how LNP-stooges and arrogant ''I'm okay, Jack, stuff you'' posters are either totally WRONG or grossly misleading in their claims that people who saved don't need their savings. The likes of UNCARINGBigBear, who formerly posted as Old Geezer, constantly rant that this and that is free anyway so you don't need to hang onto savings for the future.

    Well, a friend was just quoted $7000 for cataract surgery. Now, cataract surgery is free - but ONLY when you are virtually blind. If you want it at a point in time when your vision is compromised to the point where it is interfering with your quality of life, but the government doesn't deem it severe enough to need urgent surgery, you pay.

    Lots of people saved to ensure they could meet expenses like that and retain their quality of life, but nasty people continually assert that savers shouldn't be allowed to hang onto their money to cover costs like this when they arise.

    My neighbour paid $30,000 for dental work. Could have had a shoddy half-baked repair job done free, but not a quality set of implants with a 15-year-warranty.

    These things - and things like home help and maintenance or personalized care when needed - are the things people went without extensively to save for, and are now being deprived of by a grossly UNFAIR assets test that reduces their standard of living to lower than if they hadn't saved at all and transfers the major benefit of their saving to people who weren't as diligent and frugal - or to manipulators who ''play'' the system for unfair selfish advantage.
    Old Geezer
    8th Feb 2018
    3:19pm
    Even if a couple has under $800,000 or even $200,000 these amounts are quite affordable to them. Anyone that saved for their retirement would not find these expenses unaffordable.

    It is the OAPs that live from week to week with no other assets that find them unaffordable. These people have not saved for their retirement or spent any savings having a good time.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    8th Feb 2018
    4:43pm
    You deliberately distort the issue, OG. It's not a question of how much is needed. It's an issue of people being ENTITLED to the benefit of their savings. NOBODY should have to forfeit benefit THEY EARNED to others who didn't earn and save. That's against the entire concept behind the capitalist economy. We pay taxes. We SHOULD NOT then have our already taxed earnings taken away on retirement.
    Old Geezer
    8th Feb 2018
    5:40pm
    So the only conclusion one can draw from such statement is that anyone who saved enough money to be fully self funded is entitled to a benefit if they need it or not. I see that as being very selfish indeed. Those affected by the asset change are in the same boat as the fully self funded were before the asset change. All that has happened is that people who are deemed to have enough money like the self funded should look after themselves with taking form the taxpayers as well.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    9th Feb 2018
    11:02am
    I have never said that, OG. Nor to I think it. But to deprive people for earning and savings is wrong. Everyone complains about taxation and says it should be fair, but nobody seems to acknowledge that massive duplication of taxation imposed on one sector of the community. The wealthy self-funded get massive tax concessions. The poorer retirees get up to $1 million (or more, depending on longevity) in handouts over their retirement. And those in the middle pay high tax on earnings, save, pay tax on interest on savings, and then suffer a massive tax hit in retirement by being denied any pension benefits. They just PAY PAY PAY and get NOTHING.

    Who the hell ''deems'' who has enough money. NOBODY knows that. And NOBODY should make a decision that someone who has worked and saved is not entitled to the benefit of their endeavours. It's bad for the nation. Those only slightly above the assets threshold not taking unfairly from taxpayers. They are asking for fair compensation for the fact that after a lifetime of working, paying tax, and planning responsibly, the economic conditions that are outside their control have left them with insufficient means to fund the lifestyle they worked and saved and planned for, and they are now worse off than if they hadn't bothered.

    NOBODY should have to tolerate a lower standard of living than the most affluent full pensioner. NOBODY should be deprived of benefits they worked and saved for while those who didn't work and save get handouts.

    The stupid system you condone, OG, is precisely the system that invites exploitation in the way BigBear has manipulated to deprive taxpayers. It's DUMB. But it appears you condone what BigBear did, yet condemn those who just want a fair go WITHOUT playing the system immorally.

    Wake up! I am saying the government should recognize the stupidity and unfairness of the current system and reform it so it works for EVERYONE - not just the rich or the cheats or the dishonest or the wasteful. For the NATION. It boggles the mind that you are apparently so tunnel-visioned and bigoted that you would oppose sensible reform that benefits all.
    Old Geezer
    9th Feb 2018
    12:51pm
    Rainey you know most of that is just rubbish and you would be laughed at if you sent it to a polly.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    10th Feb 2018
    7:52pm
    A lot of the pollies agree with me, OG. They are either too gutless or too powerless to speak out. But they know I'm right. Even the corrupt self-serving mongrels who devised and voted for the policy KNOW it's wrong and I'm right. They are just too corrupt and dishonest to do anything about it.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    12th Feb 2018
    7:41am
    A lot of lollies really think people like you are nothing but whinge and that you are upset as you now have too many assets to get the OAP so you have an axe to grind. Since you say you are not a millionaire they are not far off the mark on this one. Why should couple with over a million get the pension and it's benefits when other struggle on much less? It was a long over due move by the government. It is also stupid that part pensioners get the concessions too. They should only be given to those on the full OAP. Why should a young family pay full price for everything and people with loads of money in comparison get a discount? It makes no sense to me at all.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    12th Feb 2018
    5:34pm
    A better question, BigBear, why should bludgers, spendthrifts and layabouts be handed $1 million by the taxpayer to fund retirement and hard workers kicked in the guts and left to a lesser lifestyle? Nobody wants to address that question. Too hard, isn't it?

    I'm sure a lot of LOLLIES think all sorts of STUPID things - and some POLLIES as well. But the smart ones understand maths, economics and psychology well enough to know that I am right and you are WRONG. And I never suggested a young family should pay full price for anything while people with loads of money get a discount. You make up fairy stories and then dream that I said something I neither said nor meant.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    8th Feb 2018
    12:49pm
    OG is back! Did BigBear change his name back to his old one, or has he registered two profiles?
    Old Geezer
    8th Feb 2018
    2:54pm
    Yes I got back yesterday from my family cruise, a wedding, a funeral and many other family activities. It was so awesome having all the family cruising with me and enjoying dinners and lots of time together.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    9th Feb 2018
    11:04am
    And he's back to endorsing the deprivation of people who saved well but are not wealthy enough to fund the lifestyle they planned for and deserve in old age. But no doubt he applauds the immoral manipulation by wealthy people like BigBear. Cut down the battler trying to grow to feed the tall poppies. That's OG's mantra.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    9th Feb 2018
    11:18am
    Can't let the upper working class and the middle class prosper, can we OG? They might threaten the claimed superiority of the wealthy. Goodness, they might even succeed well enough to force the wealthy to be less corrupt and immoral.
    Old Geezer
    9th Feb 2018
    12:37pm
    Not being wealthy Rainey I have no idea what you are talking about. However the wealthier people are the more generous I find them. My wealthy friends ask for nothing but their company to share a meal whereas my would be wealthy friends hand me the bill to pay.

    I have no problem with people getting wealthy but I do have a problem with those who think one can only get wealthy through immoral, unethically or other means. Most people get wealthy through one thing. Hard work. If people just got on with their work instead of whinging then they would be a lot better off.

    I do have the lifestyle I planned in old age even after a couple of health scares. I have also found that as one gets older one doesn't care as much about making money but more about doing the things ones enjoys instead.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    10th Feb 2018
    7:50pm
    Most wealthy people are anything but generous. How generous is it to hoard money tax-free in the Caymans and boost the huge salaries of the privileged while claiming the nation can't afford fair pensions and decent wages? No, wealthy people are very rarely generous.

    Who is getting wealthy through immoral or unethical means? I slogged my guts out all my life, suffering abuse and injustice continually, and I'm not wealthy - but I am moderately affluent.

    BigBear maintains wealth through immoral and unethical means, as does anyone who ''plays'' the system. But you support a system that one has to abuse to avoid unfair suffering. You want the system to persecute the honest workers and savers, and reward the crooks - and then you say you have a problem with people who get wealthy unethically. That make sNO SENSE AT ALL, OG. You are totally illogical.

    Most of those who suffer at the hands of an unfair government are HARD WORKERS. VERY HARD WORKERS. They are NOT better off, because they are being UNFAIRLY DEPRIVED OF WHAT THEY EARNED BY HARD WORK.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    11th Feb 2018
    9:24am
    Most people get wealthy only one way. Hard work. A few like you Rainey have a big win along the way but most don't keep it for long. I have never been fortunate enough to have a big win or even a small win myself. Everything I got was acquired by working hard. So I am one of those very hard workers too.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    12th Feb 2018
    5:29pm
    BigBear, I got where I am through hard work - VERY VERY VERY hard work. And it did NOT make me wealthy.

    I did NOT have a big win. I had a couple of years of ''windfall'' profits in a business AFTER working for next to nothing to 20 years to prepare.

    I have never known ANYONE who got wealthy through hard work, and I know a lot of people - both wealthy and hard workers. ALL of the wealthy, with the sole exception of a couple who got wealthy through crime, were BORN with a silver spoon. None of the hard workers who started out poor got wealthy. Comfortable, yes. Wealthy - not a hope in hell!

    It's extremely hard to get wealthy from a poor start, no matter how hard you work, and one thing I know for sure. NOBODY who has ever known real hardship and had to work hard to achieve comfort gives their money away and relies on the government. NOBODY. Two reasons: (1) those who have experience genuine hardship fear it too much to take risks, and (2) those who have known real hardship have a strong conscience about taking public money from people who need it more.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    12th Feb 2018
    5:31pm
    In other words, BigBear, you don't know what hard work is. But that's okay. Very few privileged or well off do.
    Yup I Know
    24th Apr 2018
    11:32am
    Can anyone get past the Australian newspaper,s paywall?
    Yup I Know
    24th Apr 2018
    11:32am
    Can anyone get past the Australian newspaper,s paywall?
    Yup I Know
    24th Apr 2018
    11:32am
    Can anyone get past the Australian newspaper,s paywall?


    Join YOURLifeChoices, it’s free

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