12th Nov 2018
FONT SIZE: A+ A-
The top end of town is out of touch with retirement: survey
The top end of town is out of touch with retirement: survey

Older Australians are worried that they won’t have enough money to fund their retirement, according to the findings of YourLifeChoices' latest Friday Flash Poll: Revealing the reality of retirement.

Of the 1639 survey participants, just over one third of the respondents were confident that they’d have enough money in retirement, but 65 per cent said they would not have enough or were unsure.

These results are a direct rebuttal of the Grattan Institute’s claim that there is "more than enough money in retirement". And this reaction is not only backed up by numbers. We asked, “Do you agree with the Grattan Institute’s claim that you have enough money for retirement?” and 57 per cent said ‘no’, 22 per cent were ‘unsure’ and a mere 21 per cent said ‘yes’.

Of those who responded, 18 per cent were on a full Age Pension, 26 per cent on a part Age Pension and 31 per cent are fully self-funded retirees, 17 per cent are employed, five per cent are on other pensions, and three per cent listed other personal circumstances. 

When asked how much money our members have in super, 13 per cent said less than $10,000, 15 per cent had less than $100,000, 37 per cent have between $100,000 and $500,000 and 23 per cent have between $500,000 and $1.5 million.

Only two per cent of our members have the Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia (ASFA) recommended $1.6 million for a comfortable retirement. 

Just a quick calculation of our own survey responses highlights the flaws in giving recommendations based on averages. We loosely totalled the top half of superannuation balances ($800,001 or more) using the lower number in each bracket, then averaged it out among all 1639 respondents. The total super balances of our participants would then be $143,197, whereas, in reality, around one third of our respondents had less or much less than this amount.

One of Grattan’s recommendations is to forgo government plans to increase compulsory super contributions from 9.5 per cent to 12 per cent, with the institute saying Australians would have lower quality of life during their working years than they would in their retirement years.

We asked older Australians if they would have welcomed 12 per cent compulsory super contributions instead of 9.5 per cent when they were saving for retirement – 75 per cent said they would.

YourLifeChoices members questioned the wisdom of people on high incomes handing down recommendations concerning the welfare of those living on much less. 

“It is okay for these people to say we have enough as their retirement money is large compared to the ordinary people because of their income! The same with pollies and their retirement fund. They don't care about everyday Aussies, which is why some of them are ‘cock of the hoop’ with huge pay packets. These people should try living on a pension for six months, without touching their bank account,” wrote YourLifeChoices member, ronloby.

Many criticised the gap between the Grattan Institute’s claim and the reality of retirement.

“I was amazed by the results the institute came up with. Does not fit the reality as I know it. I myself am on the full Age Pension. The self-funded retirees I know aren't living in clover, either. The insecurity of their investments is causing some heartache. Things like dental health can have a big impact as people are older. Who did the institute interview? Crazy,” wrote rtish.

“If we go with the ideas the Grattan Institute puts forward, and the government pushes, we will end up with more aged people on pensions and struggling and the next generation having nothing to look forward to. It's just silly to whine about retirees being well off, especially when large numbers are not. But it's sillier still to be attacking retirees who are moderately comfortable and trying to make them poor. The huge superannuation concessions to those on high incomes are the problem, and it's simple to address. But the rich will NEVER address problems caused by excessive benefits for the rich,” wrote OnlyGenuineRainey.

One thing is for sure, the Grattan Institute has stirred up an interesting debate and raised issues that are in need of addressing. Now, if we can only look past the numbers and get the facts straight, maybe we can find a solution to the harsh reality of retirement being lived by real retirees.

Do you think it’s right for those seemingly out of touch with retirement reality to be giving recommendations for the future of retirement?

Are you worried your money won’t last? The RetirePlanner™ tool has all the information you need.

RELATED ARTICLES





    COMMENTS

    To make a comment, please register or login
    Old Geezer
    12th Nov 2018
    10:47am
    YLC survey was very misleading. It only asked about super and most people retired today have little super compared to what they have outside super. I for one only have 10% of my wealth in super. I said I didn't know if I had enough to live on for the rest of my life simply because I don't know what lies ahead of me. None of us do. I also don't believe people should put more than required in super either.

    All super is is a tax effective but not for long investment vehicle that has strings attached. Many young people today are working as contractors as they prefer their super money in their houses than in super and I agree with them.
    Rosret
    12th Nov 2018
    12:02pm
    I won't touch those surveys. Each one is asking for just a little more insignificant information to form a composite of the person completing the survey. Who knows where the data is being on sold to.
    Dave R
    12th Nov 2018
    10:47am
    How well you manage in retirement IMO comes down to what you expect to be able to do and how well you set yourself up before being pensioned off.
    I'm 69 and retired on a full age pension. I am debt free, a home owner and own a good quality car, boat and caravan. All these items should last me the rest of my active life so I don't expect any significant capital expenses. I have a small nest egg put away for emergency use.

    In my circumstances the Age pension is enough to pay for me to enjoy the things I have and also maintain a good social life. The pensioner concession card is also a great help. Also my needs are simple.

    But I know others who struggle and barely make ends meet because their needs are different to mine.


    Dave R.
    Old Geezer
    12th Nov 2018
    11:06am
    According to YLC you should be well and truly on struggle street because you have no super.
    Dave R
    12th Nov 2018
    11:21am
    IMO super is a con for most people. Only the very wealthy gain much from all the tax concessions so super is great for the millionaire class and pretty much a waste of time for everyone else.
    This is because if super is only going to provide a retirement income similar to the age pension, which is the case for many people, then what's the point of having it as there is no nett benefit to you.
    On top of that the big super fund returns are not all that high and so those with a little money to invest could do better by putting it elsewhere as s few do with self managed super funds getting the best of both worlds.
    My little nest egg is mostly in blue chip shares and the dividends are higher than any super fund pays you.

    Dave R.
    Old Geezer
    12th Nov 2018
    12:06pm
    I am not a fan of super either and wouldn't have it unless I had a SMSF. I have a little more than one can have to get the OAP and I am proud that I support myself. However the continued fleecing of self funded retirees is not good and only makes people think self funded retirees are complete mugs.
    Aussie
    12th Nov 2018
    3:34pm
    Well done Dave ... congrats ...yes others struggle and some are force to leave Australia and live on some Asian country to enjoy a good life with only reduce pension and no extra support just the basic pension and is not easy to adjust to another culture to be able to have a decent life .....

    Congrats to you mate well done
    TREBOR
    12th Nov 2018
    4:42pm
    Yes - I agree with Dave - I had private super back in the 1980's and ditched it because it ended up costing around 70%+ in cost and taxes along the way... I'd rather put it into an investment of my own choosing.
    David
    12th Nov 2018
    9:17pm
    Well done Dave R for managing very well on just the age pension.
    You are a great example that the age pension is sufficient to live off if you save hard during your working life to pay off your home and acquire a car, boat and caravan ie your are debt free.
    The most important thing which you've touched on is living a simple life ie living within your means.
    TREBOR
    13th Nov 2018
    8:54am
    While I agree, David - it is not always easy with all the ups and downs of modern life for many to save etc and accumulate assets which will not be stripped down to nothing in some way.

    One size does not fit all.
    Rae
    12th Nov 2018
    11:10am
    I'm self funded and have no idea how much I'll need for the future. The future is unknowable and anyone trying to predict twenty or thirty years out is frankly suffering hubris.

    Just last week I spent over 20% of income paying the doctors gap and very expensive pharmacy bill for a one off treatment. No concessions so everything is charged at working people's costs.

    At some point I'll need home help and that will not be subsidised either.

    Just saying the elderly don't spend much is unrealistic for those of us not receiving welfare nor concessions.

    We may need to save hundreds of thousands for nursing homes whilst those who have no savings get pensions, concessions and nursing home care without bonds.

    It's a very inequitable situation. I don't have an expensive home, car, boat or caravan. Just income producing assets which seems to be exactly what is not encouraged now.

    And if the welfare system falls over due to too many non savers requiring billions in funding we will all be worse off.

    The Grattan report is based on a desire to introduce land taxes and increase the GST because they really do believe you can just pump very high house prices into equations and ignore debt levels. It's neo-liberal nonsense that has the world headed for 1929 max Depression. If that happens we will all be doing it very tough.
    Dave R
    12th Nov 2018
    11:46am
    That is where the pensioner concession card is such a good thing to have. I get free Optical, Medical and Dental at the local state clinic and waiting times are not too bad where I live.

    The treatment is the same as you get at private practitioners, in fact better based on some of my previous experiences as the salaried dentists there are not just treating you to extract the maximum amount of money from you.


    Then there are the rates and car and boat registration concessions plus many other things.

    I also installed solar power to reduce my electricity bills and after the pensioner electricity concession is factored in my quarterly power bill is almost zero.


    But as I posted previously everyone's situation is different and while I benefit from having done all this and life's good there are many other who don't and so find life difficult.

    Dave R.
    Old Geezer
    12th Nov 2018
    12:05pm
    Dave R The problem is some of those on here don't like to idea of anyone getting anything for free.
    Rae
    12th Nov 2018
    1:21pm
    That is great Dave. I set up my retirement based on a formula that was changed substantially by the current government. The next bunch will alter some more so that austerity continues. The franking credit changes will create some issues for savers I expect and increase pension eligibility. Maybe no bad thing.

    I'm glad we can support the aged now but wonder for how long it will continue.

    My long time doctor is close to retiring and her clinic has been purchased so I'm off to a state clinic myself that bulk bills shortly.

    I would have set up a very different annuity if I'd realised they would change the Centrelink rules without grandfathering.

    Still I'm working hard again at creating income and doing well so all isn't bad. At least I'm not dependent on Centrelink which is a bonus I suppose.

    Those who can't look after themselves need government support and that's fair enough. Let's hope we can continue to fund it as time goes by and populations increase.
    TREBOR
    12th Nov 2018
    4:48pm
    Yes, Rae - you've put the finger on some of the issues surrounding retirees as a group, not just pensioners v SFRs. There are disparities all along the way... one way or another...

    We live in a society dedicated to social and economic disparities, which to a certain extent is all well and good, but when economic disparity equal social disparity equals power disparity - it begins to stink like a dead whale floating belly-up after three weeks...

    The essence of Socialism (which is not communism) is a relative leveling of such things so as to ensure that none are left without some power and control over personal life... and this country since Federation has had a strong Socialist flavour - until recent years when the Twerp Generation got their hands on the fruits of the labours and sacrifices of previous generations and gained 'education' and status and money and power as a result. Now they all want to adhere to the Mediterraneo style of business management - where there is an absolute ruler and a bunch of serfs, and all serfs are just vassals of the ruler and of the State in turn, which also feels itself Laird of all it surveys......

    Utter nonsense.... who wants some small minded peasant stock twerp dictating to him/her?
    David
    13th Nov 2018
    9:30am
    I agree with you Rae.
    I'm a fully self-funded retiree, having saved very hard and sacrificed a lot to live a comfortable lifestyle in retirement, whilst paying heaps of taxes during my working life.
    I never have and never will receive the thousands of dollars of concessions each year that those with pensioner concession card benefit from.
    Then as you say, when I eventually will need nursing home care, I will be whacked again, having to contribute six figure sums for aged care and bonds.
    I think that self-funded retirees are the punching bag and are overlooked/ignored by governments, even though we've done them a great favour by not having to rely on the age pension in retirement. Some examples of this are the proposal by Labor to stop refunds of franking credits and the regular push to increase GST - self-funded retirees will be one of the main groups that will be impacted by this.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    13th Nov 2018
    11:00am
    Have you seen the latest, David? Now an academic at Macquarie Uni is proposing a tax on any income from superannuation in retirement phase to fund aged care. Seems the SFRs will be whacked YET AGAIN. What's the point of saving for retirement? Appears the government, academics, advisers, and half the pensioner population as well, won't be content until SFRs have lost the lot!
    TREBOR
    13th Nov 2018
    3:45pm
    I guess he/she figures academics must be excluded.
    MICK
    12th Nov 2018
    11:15am
    Most very well off people have little idea, little interest in finding out and do not care about people who are forced into poverty by their governments. They call this democracy. I call it control for the few.
    Superannuation? Most of the current generation of retirees do not have enough. The way to solve this for this government? Increase the assets test to force struggling self funded retires off any assistance, increase the working age and con retirees into selling their homes and living off the proceeds. The right wing Grattan Institute, for want of a better word, has just issued their next propaganda report pushing what no other government in the western world does: to get retirees to mortgage their homes to the government and live off the equity. This is another blatant attempt of the rich trying to own everything.

    YLC needs to not let up on this one. We are all in a Class War which will be lost if we allow this (tidal) wave to sweep over us.
    Rosret
    12th Nov 2018
    12:04pm
    Yep.
    KSS
    12th Nov 2018
    1:20pm
    Except that there is to be no increase in the working age beyond what the Labor Government already put in place and that exists now.e 67.
    Lothario
    12th Nov 2018
    3:16pm
    Tell me who is being forced into poverty Mick ?

    What do mean by not enough super? If the full OAP is sufficient , then according to ASFA a mere $70k in super will put you in a modest lifestyle.

    No one retiring these days will have zero pension, unless they blow it all on their house or holidays, which many do
    TREBOR
    12th Nov 2018
    4:51pm
    Lack of real jobs and social engineering which has devastated the accumulated assets of many plus escalating REAL costs of living via privatisation, globalisation and other falsehoods generates generational poverty for many.... pretty simple really...

    As I've said times many - we live HERE - not in the 'global economy' and certainly not in competition with the Third World out there..... fix costs of living and we can then discuss costs of labour etc... otherwise expect the gates to be slammed and locked. Has to happen some time - might as well be now....
    TREBOR
    12th Nov 2018
    8:15pm
    Not interested in listening to a working age to 67 - must revert to 65 - f88k you, Saint Julia - f88k you very much.

    (I'm69 - but I stand for everyone)...
    George
    13th Nov 2018
    12:08am
    Absolutely correct, Mick, and Trebor about the pension age. Should be Universal Pension at Age 65 with no Centrelink involvement.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    12th Nov 2018
    11:23am
    Even on this forum we are seeing out of touch people who assume that because they are well off, everyone else either is or should be, and is at fault if they are not. I even see nasty posts blaming sick people for their illness, claiming it must be a result of poor diet, and bad backs were the sufferer's fault because they lifted things incorrectly.

    This sick selfish attitude seems to be pervasive in our society today, and it's resulting in the notion that the simplest way to solve economic problems is to rob retirees of their savings and the lifestyle they worked hard to achieve. This disgusting claim that they are just persevering it for heirs who will waste it is completely unsubstantiated, and disgracefully selfish. What if they are saving it for heirs? Why not? People who DON'T save get handouts. If some wish to save to make their children's and grandchildren's lives easier, why shouldn't they have an equal right to do that? Why should they be rewarded for putting it through poker machines but punished for putting it aside for loved ones?

    Now we have Shorten saying ''if you have a healthy income, you should not pay extra tax on dividends received, and if you live off the taxpayer, you should get TRIPLE handouts (pension + concessions + franking credits), but if you SAVED your after-tax income to be self-sufficient in retirement, you should pay 30% tax on an income below the tax threshold and potentially even below the OAP level, and if that plunges you into hardship, you should STILL NEVER GET FRANKING CREDIT REFUNDS - EVER!" In other words, if you are a battler DON'T YOU DARE SAVE AND INVEST TO TRY TO AVOID BEING DEPENDANT ON OTHERS. And this is the ''Labor'' Party - ''the party for battlers''. They are happy to overfeed the rich, give more to pensioners, but if you have a low income, they will make you pay nearly 1/3rd of it in taxes that are neither legally nor morally payable - and they will justify that by calling a LEGITIMATE and NEEDED tax refund ''a loophole'', knowing full well that it is not.

    Where does the attack on retirees end? We didn't begrudge our oldies their comfort in old age. We knew our turn would come. I don't think the majority of young begrudge us our comfort either, but the out-of-touch ''I'm all right bugger you'' brigade are just so unbelievably selfish. Their greed is insatiable! And they are going to great lengths to lie to garner support, trying to convince younger Australians that we have had a ''dream run'' and have too much.

    It's past time for a research project that reveals the TRUTH.
    Old Geezer
    12th Nov 2018
    12:08pm
    Tis Gratton Research paper is a lot closer to the truth than the YLC survey.
    Rae
    12th Nov 2018
    1:30pm
    Grattan add up the "wealth" during a time of excessively high asset prices and totally ignores the $4 trillion of debt. Not worth anything unless real cashflows and incomes are included.

    We could all sell up everything and live a decade or so on the proceeds but they what?

    Having sold off most of the public assets all that's left are those small businesses and homes and superannuation. The Government has a revenue problem.
    TREBOR
    12th Nov 2018
    4:52pm
    How do they explain away Airborne knees, ankles, hips and backs as people age? Just aging it seems....
    Jannie
    12th Nov 2018
    12:37pm
    I use all of the pension to pay bills nothing left by the end of the fortnight, I have had to take funds from my super to do things like repairs on house and to pay for insurances. It is a struggle also is depressing, especially when you see immigrants driving around in expensive cars and owning houses, they are the ones ripping the system off to our detriment. So disappointed with our governments no matter who is in power.
    Old Geezer
    12th Nov 2018
    12:46pm
    You should be using our super as well as living on the OAP. That's is what it is for.
    KSS
    12th Nov 2018
    1:26pm
    Have to agree with Old Geezer on this Jannie. Superannuation is meant to support you through retirement either instead of or as a supplement to any state pension you may receive.

    And those immigrants you see in flash cars and owning houses are typically not on welfare so not 'ripping off' anyone. There are undoubtedly some that do (as indeed are some Australian born, dinky-di Australians) but making such a sweeping statement is both unnecessary and unfair.
    Rae
    12th Nov 2018
    1:35pm
    You can't blame the immigrants. They are mostly well educated and wealthy families.

    Immigrants cannot claim welfare for years after arrival. However their extended family structures do advantage them. Our government deliberately created the nuclear family here to support the housing and childcare markets. Pure neo-liberal theory policies.
    Aussie
    12th Nov 2018
    3:53pm
    Here it is the famous Jannie with her racist comments wowowowo again .... have a glass of Red while you do some research of your statement so you can get educated ..... Rae is correct so please educate yourself before making these kind of unfair and racist comments

    Racist comments like this should not be accepted in this forum ...... I have report you for this unfair and racist statements .......
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    12th Nov 2018
    6:38pm
    Aussie, it was widely reported and verified that a certain group of immigrants (defined by religion and nationality) was ripping off the public purse by claiming child care allowances to mind each other's children. It is also well established that a certain group is claiming Centrelink support for multiple wives. Is it ''racist'' to call them out for that behaviour? Jannie may be referring to those who engage in these practices, and she's entitled to raise valid objection. By all means suggest she rephrase the comment to be less sweeping, but tolerance is a virtue.

    OG and KSS, super ideally returns some extra income to top up the pension, but if a younger retiree is forced to draw on the capital, they then have nothing later when an aging home needs repair or renovation or health needs impose high costs. Jannie has every right to feel disappointed in a government that ASSUMES that people can just drain their super in early retirement and have nothing left later, and does not sensibly acknowledge that younger retirees have a greater need to preserve their savings.
    Old Geezer
    12th Nov 2018
    7:02pm
    Single mothers are just as bad. As soon as their child is old enough when their welfare is cut they find a willing man and use him to have another child. They are also carers for every oldie in their street as well. They mind each others kids and get paid for that too.
    Lothario
    12th Nov 2018
    7:36pm
    So many people ripping off the system Old Geezer

    Welfare is so easy to come by, and so many loopholes to get more than self funded retirees

    why do we bother, should just spend up and go on welfare

    your home is not considered an asset for newstart , so you could live in a $3m house and go on the dole, rent out rooms for cash,
    Old Geezer
    12th Nov 2018
    8:54pm
    Might just do that Lothario.
    Not a Bludger
    12th Nov 2018
    1:21pm
    Describing the rentseekers at the Grattan Institute as the “Top End of Town” is not only a gross misrepresentation but is also wrong.

    They are in no way the “Top End of Town” and certainly have laid no claim to represent the Top End - whatever/whoever that might be.

    Also, most interesting is that your moaning and groaning cohort clearly have no idea either - but just take the opportunity to moan and groan on in your columns, anyway.
    Rae
    12th Nov 2018
    1:37pm
    Yes rent seekers is a good term. They are keen for land taxes and increased GST and reverse mortgages. Anything to get that "wealth" back into the marketplace.
    KB
    12th Nov 2018
    1:43pm
    Each person is different and has dfiferent lifestyles and various health needs.I prefer the simple things in life. I have a budget and save for a holiday in Australia. Health car card helps with cost of medication Bulkbilled for GP visits test and x-rays,Physio after hip surgery is covered by bulk billing, Concessions help with energy water and Telecommunications with Telstra and public transport. Wallis cinemas in SA. have reduced the costs of seeing movies I appreciate the discounts received from the state and Federal Government I have looked after my mother and sister Down Syndrome at the same time..I do no help for granted I know that carers do not get enough money for looking after loved ones. Time this changed
    Lothario
    12th Nov 2018
    3:11pm
    ASFRA recommends $1,6 Million for comfortable retirement. Is that for an individual or a couple ?

    The survey asks what individuals have. How can you take individual super balances and say they dont have enough for a couple's retirement spending

    Also only 1/4 of my savings is in super . I'm sure the same for others who have share portfolios and investment properties outside super
    TREBOR
    12th Nov 2018
    5:01pm
    I thought it was a couple, but I could be corrected... if $1.6m returns 5%, that's $80k.. between two that's $40k pa or about $780 a week each... not too bad... though there are some who are doing better than that... a long-serving nurse on the state super I know cops $1k a week.... some undoubtedly get much more, since he never rose to any great height (man in a woman's world, you know)....

    If you did one of those types of sweet lifetime super jobs it can be very sweet, but the point, on those figures, is that an SFR with $1.6m in revenue incurring assets (not just deadstock like a boat or camper) is not that far behind the 8 ball with a clear shot at the top pocket.

    Many SFRs don't have $1.6m in revenue incurring assets, and thus are even worse off...
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    14th Nov 2018
    1:18pm
    A couple loses all pension entitlements with just over half that amount - and up to $100,000 might be in non-returning assets like furniture, car, personal items, and liquid cash. Less than $40,000 - further reduced by admin costs - is not a very healthy income for a couple, given that pensioner couples get more than that when you add benefits and concessions. Really, there's no point in saving for retirement unless you can achieve that magic $1.6 million (for a couple) or close to it.
    Jim
    12th Nov 2018
    3:15pm
    The usual comments, we are in a class war, no we are not, that is a myth pushed by left wing politicians around the world to gain sympathy and gather votes for their own agenda and create envy politics, many on this site like myself were born in the 40’s we knew what poverty was, although most of us didn’t know we lived in poverty because everyone was in the same boat, the statement is often pushed that the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer another myth, 40% of workers don’t pay any tax, this has come about by governments of both persuasion reducing the thresholds and putting an end to bracket creep for people working overtime and others who have worked their way up the food chain, is there rotting going on for the top end of town absolutely there is, but they are not the only ones who are rorting then tax system, it goes on every day, how many on this site can put hand on heart and say they have never had a job done cash in hand? How often do you see tradies, small buisness owners and many others who drive around in $60,000 utes and other flash cars, all at the expense of workers who can’t claim anything, due to the fact they don’t have adverts on the side of their vehicles, many of these are rorting the system, the list goes on regarding how people reduce their tax “legitimately” The gap between the rich and poor might be getting bigger I genuinely don’t know if it’s true or what the impact is, but the blame for the shortfall in available tax is shared by many, not just the top end of town. As for increasing compulsory superannuation, I think it is a great idea and I think that’s what Keating had in mind when he brought it in, many more people in years to come would not have to rely on the government for a pension, surely nobody could argue that would be preferable.
    Lothario
    12th Nov 2018
    3:26pm
    I dont think increasing super at this time is good at all. Its increases business costs and contributes towards inflation and increased interest rates
    Jim
    12th Nov 2018
    3:36pm
    I don’t agree, if the company tax rate drops to 25% most companies will manage, just as they did when compulsory super was introduced, and when Labor gets in they have promised to put everything right in the world, the amount of money they seem to think they have with all the promises they are making will be more than enough to give everyone tax breaks, and to provide money for all of their pet projects, they could introduce the increases over a couple of years.
    Lothario
    12th Nov 2018
    3:41pm
    Company tax rates havent dropped. Labor , Derryn D%ckhead Hinch and Pauline saw to that
    Jim
    12th Nov 2018
    4:37pm
    I said if the company tax rate drops, the government could afford it, don’t forget Labor won’t drop the company tax rate, they will need all the tax they can get to pay for their bribery to get votes, not that they need to do anything to win the next election, the destroyers in the LNP and the Nationals have seen to that, let’s just hope they don’t do too much damage before people realise their mistake. I suppose we can all vote for independents, some fine candidates there, Phelps for one, I mean who wouldn’t want to vote for her, she got in with less than 30% of the vote so obviously she was the most popular candidate, already siding with the crazy greens.
    Old Geezer
    12th Nov 2018
    5:04pm
    Company tax revenue will decrease considerably if no one wants fully franked dividends under Labor's unfair policy. Companies will restructure so they pay little or no tax. Not much I that for Labor at all.
    TREBOR
    12th Nov 2018
    8:18pm
    Companies can pay their taxes same as everyone else - you want to profit here, you play by our rules - if you want to take your bat and ball and fork off - someone else will rush to take over your market share.

    There endeth the lesson.
    TREBOR
    12th Nov 2018
    8:20pm
    Not quite - if every company had to pay 25%, fully 2/3 of them would have to pay more than they currently do.

    Don't make me laugh about company taxes - would that Jo and Joe Bloggs Toiler could deduct the same things before paying tax. After all - they are in the business of earning a profit, too...
    Lothario
    12th Nov 2018
    3:19pm
    I wonder how many of the 65% who said they dont have enough voted multiple times. How can you vote \No if you are on guaranteed welfare for life
    Old Geezer
    12th Nov 2018
    5:04pm
    Many here don't think the OAP is enough to live on.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    12th Nov 2018
    6:22pm
    I wonder how many of the ''I'm okay Jack bugger you" LNP trolls voted multiple times, determined to ensure the BS Grattan is peddling appears valid?
    Lothario
    12th Nov 2018
    6:25pm
    Rainey - just goes to show that this survey is crap when there are aosolutely no controls to ensure its integrity.

    A meaningless survey that will probably be used for whatever purpose suits the proponents
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    12th Nov 2018
    6:29pm
    OG, the OAP isn't enough for some who are in challenging circumstances. It's more than sufficient for those who manipulate to get a pension they don't really need, but for renters, for example, and folk with major health issues or needing extensive personal care, it is NOT enough. Some people in challenging family circumstances genuinely can't manage on it.

    I think most retirees should own a home, and many are struggling due to having been irresponsible in earlier life, but a ''one size fits all' policy is always going to leave some struggling, and it's cruel and nasty to be so abusive toward those who are genuinely struggling. We all know you are an arrogant, presumptuous egotist who thinks he knows everything about everyone, but you are WRONG
    Old Geezer
    12th Nov 2018
    6:52pm
    OGR unfortunately what I see is pure greed for many on welfare.
    TREBOR
    12th Nov 2018
    8:21pm
    A few here think the OAP is luxury and a handout.

    **laugh for the day**
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    13th Nov 2018
    10:56am
    The greed I see is from the OGs and Lothario's who constantly bully pensioners. You, OG, are the greediest of all - stealing food hampers meant for needy folk! Hard to be ''greedy'' on welfare, because it's only enough for necessities.
    Old Man
    12th Nov 2018
    5:26pm
    A car in every garage and a chicken in every pot, that's what life will soon be like. Super will go up to 12.5%, women will get subsidised with their super with a government grant to top them up equivalent to the average male balance, Newstart will be the same as a pension which, by the way, will be the same as the minimum wage. Solar panel will be on every roof, paid for by government, every suburb and town will have wind turbines in every second street and immigration will be doubled. My local Labor MP has told us all of this and who would question him.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    12th Nov 2018
    6:24pm
    Is he a Labor MP, and supporting ripping off SFRs to fund all this?
    Old Geezer
    12th Nov 2018
    6:51pm
    What the point of having any money or even having a job then?
    Lothario
    12th Nov 2018
    6:52pm
    Is Mick your local labor MP ?
    roy
    12th Nov 2018
    7:38pm
    Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. Shifty Shorten will give us a land flowing with milking honey for sure.

    And MICK is MICK not Mick, Lothario

    He will be very upset with you and he is so easily upset.
    TREBOR
    12th Nov 2018
    8:24pm
    **throws a canard in the ring** WELL - about time for soe good old socialist government again... two chickens in every pot.. two chicks in every bed.. that's the right way...
    TREBOR
    13th Nov 2018
    8:51am
    Super will go up to 12.5%:- it was supposed to go up - but as we all know the system needs changes.

    women will get subsidised with their super with a government grant to top them up equivalent to the average male balance:- which is silly - if you pay someone for time off or offer them extra, you have to do that across the board for the unemployed, DSPs, Vet Pensioners, OAPs, and anyone else who takes time off work for any reason. Sounds like the usual guff from labor about the poor suffering women - will they address the super gap against men in fifteen years time when the fruits of affirmative action come home?


    Newstart will be the same as a pension which, by the way, will be the same as the minimum wage:- Newstart needs to rise - pensions need a little bit... such a policy is like a 'minimum national wage' as above, and must apply to everyone.

    Solar panel will be on every roof, paid for by government, every suburb and town will have wind turbines in every second street:- Not such a bad idea.... I'll bet it includes a pay-back policy.

    immigration will be doubled:- we also have visited that one - immigration needs to be curtailed, especially from groups inimical to Western values and cultures.... multi-culturalism if a failed policy - time for some new thinking along (sorry 'bout that) national grounds first.

    My local Labor MP has told us all of this and who would question him:- you should always question politicians, but like true psychopaths, they always have an answer no matter how stupid, in this case already bashed out in the smoke-filled back rooms filled with perfume and white wine these days. Pussy-whipped Labor is as useless as a feminist's lap dog, or even worse.

    BTW - business has no place in government, and the BCA with 150 members (and their tame dogs like the Grattan) is a single hair on the tail of the dog currently wagging the dog. Talk about Bolshevism... the absolute minority group who happen to hold the guns of jobs and too much inside contact. Bolshevism for capitalists - works like a dream (which is what it is).
    TREBOR
    13th Nov 2018
    8:52am
    What an utter lack of choice we have in the next government - never been worse in my opinion...

    I'm voting for Independents... all the way and with no preferences to any of these leeches and ideological clowns.
    double j
    12th Nov 2018
    5:40pm
    I have no super, zero, zilch but I am a self funded retiree . Let’s see the Gattern report put my square peg into a round hole
    George
    13th Nov 2018
    12:05am
    Yes, ""The top end of town is out of touch with retirement". So are the politicians we have. Grattan Institute needs to be shut down / ignored as it is a right-wing tool of the rich and are completely out of touch producing fake so-called "research" results.
    Adrianus
    13th Nov 2018
    9:01am
    George, the Grattan institute has as much right to speak on important political matters as the ABC. Last time I checked, the Marxists have not been successful with their revolution.
    George
    13th Nov 2018
    11:53am
    Marxists? Maybe your mates? As far as I am concerned, any agency (left or right) which produces obviously fake results (in this case using averages, etc, to twist the results) must have their funding withdrawn by the Govts and many private companies which support them. The Fed Govt and many private companies are run by many right-wing loonies, that's why this institute is getting away with such fraudulent publications which have no validity and hence deserves serious action against them.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    14th Nov 2018
    1:13pm
    Adrianus, no organisation should have the right to use government money to engage in flawed research and publish untruthful and harmful reports.

    Grattan AVERAGED voluntary superannuation contributions to base findings on the assumption that even the lowest income earners ALL contribute voluntarily. They also ASSUMED that EVERYONE works 37 years uninterrupted and enjoys employer-funded contributions to super for all of that time. AND they ASSUMED that retirees do not need to - and should not - benefit from wage increases or general lifestyle improvements, but should only receive basic CPI increases.

    These ASSUMPTIONS prove them totally inept, unqualified, and an utter disgrace. They SHOULD be silenced.
    Lothario
    14th Nov 2018
    1:16pm
    Rainey - perfectly legitimate assumptions for the purpose of the report
    You are getting your knickers in a knot for nothing
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    14th Nov 2018
    1:21pm
    They are certainly NOT legitimate assumptions. They result in a totally invalid and biases load of BS! Of course it's easy to conclude retirees have ''more than enough'' when you assume more than half have way more than they could possibly have, and you are happy to abuse them by insisting they don't deserve a decent lifestyle.

    I repeat, these assumptions prove them totally inept, unqualified, and an utter disgrace. They SHOULD be silenced.
    Lothario
    14th Nov 2018
    1:31pm
    I repeat , perfectly legitimate assumptions
    Super has been compulsory for a long time and most people retiring now should have a tidy sum
    Of course there will be people falling through the cracks . For them we have the OAP welfare net
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    14th Nov 2018
    5:36pm
    Firstly, Lothario, it is irrelevant how long super has been compulsory. NOTHING about a compulsory super program suggests that ALL people make VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS. Obviously. vast numbers DO NOT - generally because they can't afford to. INVALID ASSUMPTION 1.

    Secondly. hundreds of thousands have interrupted work lives - most women for a start, and vast numbers of men who suffer illness, are retrenched, become disabled such that they have to cease work or at least change jobs after a break. To assume that people have 37 years of uninterrupted work life is TOTALLY INVALID.

    And thirdly, retirees are entitled to LIVE LIFE - not just EXIST. To deny them a share in the benefits of social advancement is downright ABUSE. INVALID ASSUMPTION 3.

    You are showing yourself to be as arrogant, selfish, inept, bigoted and irrelevant as the morons at Grattan, Lothario. Like them, you think just because YOU are privileged. everyone else is either equally well off or undeserving.
    Adrianus
    15th Nov 2018
    9:57am
    Rainey, I have not read the report but those assumptions seem valid.
    1. Workers can and should make a voluntary contribution. To say a worker cant afford to save 3% of their pay is poppycock.
    2. If not 37 years then what figure would you use? I retired early and worked 45 years. Got sick, lost jobs, raised a family etc etc. The average 23 yo today has 44 years to do the same.
    3. Entitlement to live in dignity yes, to live life and not just exist, yes I agree. I think we have one of the most advanced and generous social welfare systems in the world. If it were not so, then many who whinge about it would have gone elsewhere.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    15th Nov 2018
    9:20pm
    Adrianus, the report is not about today's workers. It's about current retirees who DID NOT HAVE ACCESS TO SUPERANNUATION. And on a basic wage, with children to support and educate, NO YOU CANNOT SAVE 3% OF YOUR INCOME. I saved well, but I could not save a cent until my children had all graduated university. It was a struggle just to pay off a home.

    Thirty seven years may well be feasible for MALES who are fortunate enough not to suffer retrenchment. Many suffer years of unemployment.

    And no, we DO NOT have one of the most generous welfare systems in the world. If that were so, I would not be struggling to get by despite saving more than the unfair asset threshold, and people would not be living on the streets (and I know many who are). Our system is overly generous to manipulators and spendthrifts. It is extraordinarily mean to responsible battlers. As for going elsewhere - vast numbers have no option. I can't leave Australia, no matter how much better my life might be elsewhere. I have family commitments that dictate where I live. Millions are in the same boat. Having worked, raised a family, potentially bought a home, furnished a home, and established themselves in a community, they don't have the luxury of just running off to where a better lifestyle is more affordable.

    The assumptions are NOT valid because they are NOT accurate in their application to the majority of retirees today - and that is who the report was about. It wasn't about some arbitrary and unknown future. It claimed TODAY'S RETIREES have ''more than enough'', and clearly THEY DO NOT. Averaging NEVER gives an accurate perspective. It is distorted by the inclusion of a minority of very high wealth individuals. To assess the wealth of the majority of retirees, these high wealth individuals must be excluded and assumptions must be made that accurately reflect the circumstances of MOST retirees. Clearly, MOST retirees today DID NOT make voluntary super contributions and DID NOT enjoy 37 years of employer-funded superannuation contributions. Therefore, the report is total BS.
    Adrianus
    15th Nov 2018
    10:23pm
    Rainey, I personally think Pareto was a genius. A mathematical genius. However, these days we are consumed with the concept of equality. Now, in order to reach equality or any goal for that matter, we must have a clear target. It appears to me that todays average is tomorrows equality. This is why the average is so important. It represents the completion, the nirvana. Only when the average is equal to the top and bottom of the scale will we not have a struggle.
    But, as I say, Pareto was a genius. He could have predicted this struggle for equality would outlast us all.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    16th Nov 2018
    6:46am
    "Only when the average is equal to the top and bottom of the scale will we not have a struggle."
    True. Adrianus. but the greed inherent in the capitalist system ensures that goal will never be pursued, let alone achieved. The rich never have enough. Their goal is suppression of the poor and clear superiority. They want to be lords and masters with people bowing and scraping at their feet. And Grattan Institute actively supports their pursuit of that objective.
    Adrianus
    16th Nov 2018
    9:54am
    If you agree with the premise that the average today is the goal(albeit impossibly unattainable), then you also agree with the ideology of removing incentive for people to accrue wealth. This is where I get a little lost, because it is aspirational wealth building which gives Australians our generous lifestyle, our hospitals, schools, social security budget which supports our 'love thy neighbour' attitude.
    Aspiration underpins our strong economy.
    I firmly disagree with the argument that you can make the poor rich by making the rich poor. This is the simplistic ideology of a bank robber. I would rather we focussed on making everyone rich.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    18th Nov 2018
    3:40pm
    Adrianus, I ABSOLLUTELY DO NOT agree with the ideology of removing the incentive for people to accrue wealth. But BOTH LNP and ALP are doing just that - except that they are ONLY removing the incentive for the working and lower middle class, and they are transferring the wealth stolen from the lower classes to the filthy rich. They are not giving the rich an ''incentive'' to accrue wealth. They are STEALING from battlers to GIFT to the rich.

    I disagree, also, with the argument that you can make the poor rich by making the rich poor. But you certainly CANNOT make the poor rich by making workers and middle class poor, and that's what the government and opposition are doing. And you CAN improve overall wealth and social harmony by making the rich pay their fair share. And that's my mantra. Make the wealthy pay fairly. Let the workers and middle class BENEFIT fairly from their work and responsible living. Retain incentives - but make those incentives stronger at the lower end where they are more needed and reduce them at the top end where neither incentives nor added wealth is of broad social benefit.

    Sadly, the government is doing EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE. And the ALP is pursuing the same goals - obscene riches for the rich, and screw everyone else into poverty.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    18th Nov 2018
    3:46pm
    And BTW. Adrianus. Grattan Institute is using invalid data for precisely the purpose of removing incentives for the workers and middle class and punishing people for working and saving. Their recommendations are squarely aimed at taking as much as possible from workers and savers - but to give to the RICH, not the poor.
    WHOCARES
    16th Nov 2018
    2:26am
    I remember being told as a 16 year old if i invested $40 per month - that i would have over a million by the time i was 55 and now i have just over 40 thou at 45; and put far more then $40 per month in the super scam. I realised that it is only another cash grab by extortionist thieving scum government pigs, as is every other garbage they concoct. Now i am supposed to slog my guts out at 70 as probably most other white men accused of all the so called problem yet we are the slaves the providers and every other crap. 70 doing hard labour, i would rather be dead, because why bother? Jusdt to give some other scum a free life at my expense. DO IT YOURSELF BLUGGERS / LEECHES. As well as suffer all the dishing outs while others get away with it all. To be fair though it is white men, white women, Asians, blacks and all other scum in government positions spewing this garbage out and raking it in. NEWS FLASH, i was not born 200 years ago or even 80 years ago. by the time i was able to have a hand in anything, It was just over 20 years ago - so all the crap being spewed onto television and laying blame on me as a white wan is defamation. It is sexist, racist and a load of crap. I suffer like everyone else at the hands of a few government scumbags who lie. SUPER is just another one of their scams as is all the minority crap. I AM A MINORITY so wake up. We have all been duped, get it through your heads.
    Adrianus
    16th Nov 2018
    8:01am
    WHOCARES, I could not agree more. You are not alone in your frustration. This nonsense about older white males is part of a much bigger problem. Why is the Labor Party blindly following their USA counterparts the Democrats? Their relationship with the Democrats is a real problem for Australia.
    When African Americans did not have a vote, the Democrats started the KKK to keep them down. And now that the African Americans have a vote the Democrats are whipping them into a frenzy about white men. White men are now the enemy of the left. It was only a matter of time before this hatred and racial discrimination was used by Labor in the form of identity politics. An American Billionaire funded GetUp which is a lobby group for Labor, to infiltrate the minds of Australians.
    Australians suffer at the hands of both Labor and LNP regardless of who is holding the gavels. To some extent we are being manipulated for the benefit of the political and Public Service elite. Agendas which have no particular goal in mind are being blindly and enthusiastically pursued by the masses, hoping for a few crumbs to fall from the hands of the political elite. They will hate you because you are a white male, while at the same time, call you a racist for defending yourself from this insanity.
    Adrianus
    16th Nov 2018
    9:57am
    WHOCARES, the next time you are confronted by a feminist who argues you have no place in the modern world, then just remind her that it was a white male who invented the tampon. It was also a white male who invented the sanitary pad. White males care.
    KIAH
    18th Nov 2018
    7:23pm
    .The "applicator tampon" was developed and patented in 1931 by Earl Hass a doctor from Colorado, who did NOTHING further about it. It was a WOMAN, Gertrude Tendrich, who bought the patent and started to produce it. The newer version, the no-applicator kind, was invented by the German gynecologist Dr Judith Esser-Mittag,

    The very first disposable pads were made by NURSES in France, looking for new methods to stop excessive bleeding, particularly on the battlefield. The first pads were made from wood pulp. Commercial manufacturers borrowed this idea and the first disposable pads called the Southball pad were available for purchase as early as 1888.

    .
    Farside
    16th Nov 2018
    11:35am
    When YLC states "These results are a direct rebuttal of the Grattan Institute’s claim that there is "more than enough money in retirement". And this reaction is not only backed up by numbers.", you have to question the academic rigour of the YLC analysis. It is simply unconvincing to compare results of a simplistic reader survey, i.e. an opinion poll, with a data based methodical analysis. Bias error anyone? If you want to attack the Grattan findings then you need to highlight errors in Grattan's methods and analysis or undertake independent research that results in competing conclusions.


    Join YOURLifeChoices, it’s free

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