7th Mar 2019
Pensioners need real change – not just small change
Pension poverty

Would you preference a political party that prioritises pension increases?

An overwhelming 94 per cent of YourLifeChoices Age Pension Poll respondents say that’s a real possibility.

On 20 March 2019, the Age Pension will increase by $9.90 per fortnight for singles and $7.40 per person for couples. Again, it is no more than a cup of coffee or a loaf of bread each week, but it is still an increase – of sorts.

But not enough to keep up with the cost of living, say 63 per cent of respondents.

The Age Pension base rate has not increased since 2008, and 92 per cent of survey respondents say it’s time to lift it.

When asked by how much, 45 per cent said $100 per fortnight would suffice, 33 per cent say $160 is required and 19 per cent say $60 a fortnight would be sufficient. Only three per cent think the current rate is appropriate

YourLifeChoices members shared their opinions on the Age Pension.

“The Age Pension should be a percentage of federal politicians’ base rates. When they get a pay rise, so do pensioners. Until you have set parameters, this will be an ongoing problem, so cut the ‘BS’ and fix it with one stroke/legislation. Who wants the pensioner vote at the next election?” wrote YourLifeChoices members Chris T.

Others think pensioners are already doing fine.

“Yes, give the greedy leaners more, while they cheer the theft from the battling self-funded,” wrote OlderandWiser.

Others disagree with this sentiment.

“Leaners is a derogatory term and should not be used,” wrote Paddington.

Some said there is a bigger picture to consider.

“Given the slow growth in wages, housing price crash, and Labor's decision to take money away from low-income single-family residents, there should be a freeze on pension increases, until the economy and everyone else is collectively better off. We simply cannot afford a pension increase at this time,” wrote Lothario.

While some may view pensioners as “greedy leaners”, many pensioners – such as YourLifeChoices member Eggles01 – are in the pre-compulsory super generation and rely on the Age Pension to survive.

“I am now 76 years old. When I started work in 1958, there was no such thing as superannuation. To make it worse in my case I was put on a disability pension in 1991 at the age of 49. I was classified as ‘unemployable’ due to my injuries while I was working – wait for it – by the visiting Government doctor who placed me the disabled pension. I had the injuries in 1982, so I ask you how well you would cope under those circumstances?”

These are the people who need real change – not just small change.

Many age pensioners are heading into winter knowing that half the time they will have to choose between eating and turning on their heaters. These are the pensioners who need help.

Pension poverty is real. It’s time politicians realised this and did something about it.

“The real leaners are the retiring MPs collecting money left, right and centre. Even though they have millions and a lot of property they are not asset-tested and often get another job after retiring, but still get a government pension. Why not spend your time attacking them instead of the pensioners who are struggling? Not all are leaners,” wrote musicveg.

When it comes to alternatives to raising the base rate, OlderandWiser may actually be onto something.

“The only solution is to abolish the assets test and test income and deemed income. Why should someone who settles for a lower value home be punished and deprived while someone who sinks a million into a house get a nice pension and concessions?” wrote OlderandWiser.

“Abolish the assets test and test income and deemed income only. That removes the incentive to over-invest in the family home and ends the unfairness to those who can't generate good investment returns.” .

Do you think the Age Pension should become an election issue? Do you have an idea to solve pension poverty? Take part in our Age Pension Poll and share your opinions in the comment section below.

RELATED ARTICLES





    COMMENTS

    To make a comment, please register or login
    OlderandWiser
    7th Mar 2019
    10:03am
    I don't want my comment, quoted above, to be misinterpreted. I don't dispute that there are some pensioners living in poverty and in genuine need of help, and I think we need to do more for them. The issue, for me, is the greed and selfishness that is motivating support for denying people who worked hard and saved well the benefits they earned, and claiming excessive benefits for manipulators and spendthrifts.

    We need a return to personal responsibility. We need incentives and rewards for the lifestyle choices that are good for the economy - not this continual harping on 'take from anyone who appears to have a little and give to anyone who appears (or claims) not to have as much'. Why don't they have as much? It's usually because they chose to spend more on immediate pleasures. Fine. Good luck to them. But why should those who went without those pleasures to save now have to hand their savings to those who chose the immediate pleasures instead?

    I keep seeing renters harping on the inadequacy of rent assistance and claiming they shouldn't have to move away from family and friends or into smaller accommodation. In an ideal world, true - they shouldn't have to. But those of us who busted ourselves paying off a mortgage have to live where we can afford to live. Those of us who don't qualify for a pension under harsh and unfair rules have to adjust our lifestyles. Why should we have to deplete our hard-won savings while those who made different lifestyle choices get more handouts. Oh, yes, it's the old 'luck' card! What a load of BS! Luck had nothing to do with it in most cases. It was bloody hard work and sacrifice. Yes, some folk have more luck than others. (I had almost none!) Some have better opportunities. Some are smarter. But if we keep abusing and stealing from the people whose hard work and saving are helping the budget, we'll have a nation of needy people and nothing to give them - like Italy and Greece;

    The 'entitlement' attitude is ruling our society, and it seems the sole criteria for entitlement is the appearance of need. We should go back to the notion that entitlement derives from work and responsible living. People are ENTITLED to enjoy the lifestyle they earned by their work and lifestyle choices. If we did that, there would be greater overall prosperity and far more capacity to increase benefits to those in genuine need. While the appearance of need - or the greedy demands - are the criteria, too much will continue to go to the manipulators and spendthrifts - as it does at present.

    I am not opposed to pensions. I needed welfare badly at times and I'm endlessly grateful for our welfare system. What I oppose rigorously is the greed and selfishness of those who demand people who worked hard and saved well sacrifice all that they earned to hand to manipulators and spendthrifts. Sadly, there are a few on this site who are downright abusive bullies and attack anyone who exposes the truths of our flawed system and Labor's appalling intent. (One even resorted to stalking me online - apparently DESPERATE to stop me exposing the truth of Labor's hideous policy!)
    One can only assume they are, or have been, manipulators who benefited unfairly from those flaws. And clearly they have no respect for people who are suffering unfairly for their past honesty and integrity.
    Anonymous
    7th Mar 2019
    10:28am
    Well said Wise one .
    I stand by what I said 100%
    Grateful
    7th Mar 2019
    10:53am
    OlderandWiser. Your first line could solve many issues regarding the Age pension. Especially the continual dispute between whether it is welfare or an entitlement.
    So let's start with that opening of yours "I don't want my comment, quoted above, to be misinterpreted. I don't dispute that there are some pensioners living in poverty and in genuine need of help, and I think we need to do more for them."

    THAT is what should be determined first, before anything else.
    Let's determine who are those people and how do they "qualify" to be classified as such.
    Those pensioners who are living in poverty and are in genuine need of help.
    For mine, all who fit into that category are entitled to a basic WELFARE payment. Fundamentally!! Like a disabled person is entitled to a Disability pension. No elderly person who has lived in Australia for all or most of their lives and contributed to this great country should ever live in poverty and in genuine need of help!!!
    We know what is classified officially as "the poverty level" and the amount of assets and income that is classified as to be "living in poverty". That's a great start.
    And Centrelink KNOWS who of their recipients fall into that category. It would not be hard at all, to segregate that group into a special category of "Age Pensioner" from those others who receive the Age Pension but are not "living in poverty".
    There would,therefore, be two classes of Age Pension, which pays enough to those who's assets and income deem them to NEED "welfare", "help", to get them out of "poverty" and the rest would receive their pension as a well earned and deserved entitlement for their life's contributions, based upon a more equitable assets and income test that would not, as it happens now, take from those that genuinely need WELFARE assistance.
    It probably would end up being cost neutral if done properly and kills many issues with the one process.
    Those who are "living in poverty" cannot complain about being considered to be welfare recipients, because that is what they NEED and the others can stop considering those recipients to be "leaners" as their payments would not be affected by the welfare payments being paid to the genuinely NEEDY recipients.
    Why can't that simple process be implement very quickly.
    It is quite immoral to see pension payments being paid to people with hundreds of thousands of dollars in assets, which payments reduce the amount that can and should be paid to those living in poverty. It is simply not a "fair go"!!
    TREBOR
    7th Mar 2019
    11:34am
    Easy to say when, for instance, your choice in 'partner' is not flawed by the other one's insanity and such... I suppose you could call that 'luck'. And most have no guarantee of reliable income.. not only that, but not all get the freebies involved in knowing how to manipulate the tax system (steal cattle from the ATO Corral) - or perhaps more importantly, would even do it if they could... then there are those with preferential super schemes and those who've had super schemes for a lifetime of work.

    Not all can go into a successful business, but must reply on a regular wages income.

    You can't just dismiss 'luck', and certainly hard work and deserving have nothing to do with it.

    I doubt that, in retirement, anyone would be 'stealing' anything from those who've, say, enjoyed a tax-free run via manipulation and cattle theft from that ATO Corral.

    Our tax system is fatally flawed and does not reflect real incomes for many, including many companies and corporations, but especially for those with the cunning and lack of integrity to take advantage of the countless loop-holes and dodges in the tax system.

    Now somebody trot out the old 'politics of envy' for stating realities and hard facts that show a need for real change - the politics of envy is on the 'other' side of this question - it lies with those who feel that anyone thrust down on their luck is somehow undeserving, and thus they are envious that person gets anything for apparently nothing, while they slaved and struggled to get their bit.

    I simply cannot train fools into the correct ways of thinking.
    Sundays
    7th Mar 2019
    11:36am
    Grateful, it’s a good suggestion. However, there are those like older and wiser who will continue to maintain that the needy will be people who made lifestyle choices and don’t deserve handouts. For that reason, I prefer the New Zealand model where everyone gets a pension and tax paid on extra to avoid any stigma placed on vulnerable people
    Spondonian
    7th Mar 2019
    11:38am
    You speak the truth of the matter
    TREBOR
    7th Mar 2019
    12:24pm
    Indeed, Sundays - some insist it is all about life choices and not just - say - a bad start followed by years of struggle and worthless management and poor governments and so forth. Most do not get a sweet ride.....

    We live in a society governed and controlled by thieves and liars - just putting it simply.

    Wow - look at that program on that Tasmanian disappearance - the Tassie cops actually raided and charged a lawyer for obstructing justice because he tracked down a witness and got a statement from that witness contrary to what they said were the facts.

    Now that's reasoned argument based on different facts and interpretations, isn't it? Kinda shows the real jack-boot, eh?

    Hmmm - about that Martin Bryant thing....
    KSS
    7th Mar 2019
    12:55pm
    Well said OlderandWiser.

    TREBOR you made your choice and you still do. All choices have consequences but you are responsible for your choices. 'Luck' plays no part.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    7th Mar 2019
    1:04pm
    Olderandwiser. The only selfishness and greed is from the LNP. we need to make the OAP simpler and universal. The greedy ones are those that oppose any changes because they think they will be cast into poverty when in reality 95% of them will be no worse off & in some cases even better off.
    Grateful
    7th Mar 2019
    1:21pm
    It is still very unfair and unconscionable that aged Australians in this day and age do "live in poverty and need help".

    That can only be rectified if they were targeted for individual treatment.

    The discussion is about pensioners living in poverty in Australia and how it should be resolved!!

    That should be a prime issue for resolution by our government of whatever persuasion. Nothing to do with politics, luck, cause etc. and everything else, albeit also needing review,is quite irrelevant and should be looked at quite separately.

    NO aged citizen of Australia should be living in poverty. Period!! THAT is THE issue for very urgent attention.
    TREBOR
    7th Mar 2019
    1:45pm
    There are more circumstances then 'choice' and 'luck, people.. get with the program.

    Is it 'luck' or 'choice when the management of a company runs it into a brick wall, thrusting many workers out of a job and into a piss-poor jobs market? Is it 'luck' or 'choice' or be injured and laid up for a long time? Is it 'luck' or 'choice' wot work for a company that decides to promote a fool into management who wrecks the joint?

    If it were only pure black and white, we'd all be masters of our own universe.... and everyone would be rich....

    Some of you need to grow up .... the world is far bigger and more complex than your little backyard...
    Sundays
    7th Mar 2019
    1:49pm
    KSS, I have a comfortable retirement because there has been no chronic illness, long periods of unemployment, divorce, failed business, retrenchment etc which throw people’s plans and choices into disarray. I’d say that was luck
    TREBOR
    7th Mar 2019
    5:32pm
    Sorry, OaW - you lost the moment you uttered that silly word 'leaners' - you have zero idea what people are and have done.
    Mandy
    7th Mar 2019
    6:11pm
    Lothario am I missing something about LNP. Up till now I have only heard about ALP wanting to raise taxes, take away pensioner's rights to franking credits, negative gearing and raising capital gains tax. Many Australians have bought extra properties with the intention of one day selling them to fund their retirement. If the thrifty are continuously robbed they will eventually throw up their hands and say "what the hell, lets live for today and let tomorrow take care of itself."
    Sundays
    7th Mar 2019
    6:48pm
    Trebor, a term first used by Joe Hockey. One of the biggest learners of them all
    Misty
    7th Mar 2019
    8:45pm
    Trouble is Mandy we have 2 Lotharios commenting here, one the complete opposite of the other, so either the original Lothario has had a brain storm or he has multiple personalities, or the other option, someone is taking the Mickey out of him.
    Bes
    7th Mar 2019
    10:02pm
    Well stated OlderandWiser.
    We could all use a decent pension especially when we've worked and paid our due's.
    Well done those who could afford to plan too!
    For me I know where my vote is going.
    As the policies of Labor gradually unfold, people are asking themselves, "How are we going to afford to live and what will Australia be like?"
    Well, there is a Silent majority.
    The pensioners who have lived through a couple of Labor governments.
    And young WORKING families looking to rent or buy a home and keep cool and warm are wondering why they are being forced to face that elephant in the room, Power Cost and Reliability?

    The (solutions) that Labor gives in offhand news grabs, simply don’t look promising to ordinary folk.
    NOT one word about the Deficit.
    AND they tell us to vote for someone else if we don’t like it?
    We know there will be a PRICE TO PAY due to another big spend. (Again)

    I have never voted Liberal but common sense tells me that I will.
    Out of necessity I need to!
    And also Australian Conservatives for the Senate for Common Sense.
    Simply because of the alternative and all of the ‘baggage’ that comes with Labor.

    The silent majority are a little tired of Political Correctness and all of its implications against our culture and beliefs.
    The funded protests against our traditions.
    Of our COST OF LIVING and POWER costs while we live in a country full to the brim with resources, which we sell to other countries to use to power their economies and then sell their products back to us!
    While we in Australia are told by a minority that we can’t use it!
    And the one thing that Morrisons government has taken to task is the Deficit. OUR NATIONAL DEBT is real and needs to be addressed and not added to.
    I have not seen nor heard of the word (Deficit) being addressed or used in any way by Labor. ONLY Spend Spend and Subsidise!

    Common Sense tells us, that EVERYTHING that is Government Funded is Funded 100% by the taxpayers of Australia. Labor is already off the scale!

    And I simply ask myself, which one can I, as a pensioner of today afford and still enjoy a comfortable life?
    And my Grandchildren and Great Grandchildren, of tomorrow?
    Misty
    7th Mar 2019
    10:43pm
    And who do you think has doubled the net public debt since coming to govt Bes?, this Coalition govt, THAT IS WHO, and were we not supposed to get cheaper energy once the Carbon Tax was removed?, well our power bills have only increased since then, not gone down, don't believe the spin politicians of all parties try to make us believe. I was listening to an econamist this morning talking about the latest GDP figures and he said that from now on everything will be political that parties come out with, whatever that means.
    Misty
    7th Mar 2019
    10:50pm
    Oh and btw Bez if you are talking about coal mines, well maybe not your grandchildren, but school children from 50 countries around the world are taking the day off school in April, to protest about govts not doing enough about Climate Change. They are the voters of the not to distant future, so govts of all persuasions should sit up and take notice.
    TREBOR
    7th Mar 2019
    10:52pm
    Bes, the salient things you list:-

    Power prices - too high and rising ...
    https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2017/07/privatisation-pushed-australias-electricity-costs/

    Funded demos against our traditions.
    National debt.

    All under the current LNP government for the past six years. Those guys shape up magnificently on the floor of parliament, ranting about communists and socialists and welfare - but the reality is that they themselves actually promote the very same things - PPL, childcare subsidies, unemployment benefits, pensions, and a host of welfare to the rich and to business - they just don't want to own up to it.

    No government worth its salt has no socialism in it - and socialism is not a dirty word, but simply the reality of all decent governments. what you see, hear and read is just theatre - in their case to bluster and attempt to cover up the reality that they cannot abandon any of these socialist issues, and if they did, they would be shown the door very rapidly.

    The problem is not pensions and such for retirees - it is government spending overall that needs to be fully reviewed - and not by some ridiculous stacked 'commission of audit'.....

    As someone said yesterday - where has all the extra money borrowed by the LNP gone, since we are still in the same boat despite more than doubling the debt? Where is the massive infrastructure? Where are the forward-looking plans for the nation? Where are the real results from all this borrowing and planning?

    Well - much of it is to prop up a dying economy which is being raped daily by offshore tax evaders who remove billions in profits from our shores.... so this government borrows to keep up this loss that is is actively supporting... what kind of idiot business sense is that? It's like telling a bunch of outlanders they can come in to work, take home the produce, sell it, pay the company nothing while receiving subsidy by way of wages, and the company then borrows to keep up this insanity.

    **scratches head in disbelief**
    GeorgeM
    9th Mar 2019
    12:07am
    Some excellent comments, Trebor, especially about "luck" and "tax system". I have often thought about the role of various factors and the following always come up - luck (positive or negative) / some call it God's wish, capabilities (inherent and learned), hard work (if you get the opportunity), and the Govt tax system (if you can exploit it). The biggest factor out of all of these is...."LUCK"! It can cancel out everything, or give you a boost irrespective of everything else! Anyone who doesn't understand this has not earned the right to be called mature or wise, irrespective of age. Also, that many people have had luck (in either direction) affect them not once or twice, but on multiple occasions - either taking you to the top, or dumping you into hell. Besides the examples you gave, just think about that guy in USA who was released from prison recently after serving 40+ years for murder after new technology (DNA) found it could not have been him! Also, always remember the thousands who died in the tsunami didn't choose to be there. On the other hand there are some Leaners - name Hockey come to mind readily - always clawing benefits from the taxpayer and got away with it so far.
    OlderandWiser
    10th Mar 2019
    6:36pm
    I note Sundays again misrepresenting me and making defamatory comments, after I took pains to clarify what I have said all along - NEVER denigrating anyone in genuine need, but noting that our pension system encourages and rewards rorting 'leaners' who abuse the system. And THEY ARE LEANERS. They are also the disgusting creeps who are cheering Labor's attack on honest, hard-working battlers who are contributing to the budget and enabling more welfare and government services by doing so.

    Trebor, your comments about 'luck' have some merit, but to assume that all who saved were 'lucky' or benefited from tax concessions and condone taking from them now on those grounds is disgracefully dishonest and unfair. We make our luck. Divorce isn't a result of bad luck. It's a result of carelessness choices and failure to work at a relationship. Sickness and disability is bad luck, but some play it up and demand sympathy and handouts and others fight it and make the best of a bad hand. (My partner suffered severe C-PTSD, depression, anxiety, and significant physical disability, but he worked as much as he could - in physically demanding, unsafe, low paid and unrewarding jobs, because we never assumed bad luck made us more entitled! A relative suffered extremely mild disability, or faked it, and took handouts for life, and now claims bad luck!)

    At the end of the day, very few are moderately comfortable in retirement due to 'luck'. If you didn't win the birth lottery, it takes a lot of hard work and a lot of sacrifice to accumulate a nest egg, and ordinary working Australians don't have a lot of opportunity to benefit from tax concessions. Some wouldn't know how to manipulate the tax system. Taking from these people, and excusing the theft by claiming they were 'lucky' or benefited from a skewed tax system, is disgusting.

    Labor is lying about franking credits, and can't even be consistent. It says they are tax paid by high income earners and therefore should e credited, but suddenly become 'not tax but a rort or gift' in the hands of low income earners who genuinely need the refund to stay off the OAP and continue BENEFITING the treasury by not taking tens of thousands a year to fund their retirement.

    It's time everyone stopped subscribing to lies and meanness, and peddling the politics of envy, and stood up for fairness for all - and TRUTH -which is that plenty of unlucky battlers who paid far more tax than was fair are now being TAXED at more than 100% of their income by being denied a pension. And any pensioner who suggests those battlers should not receive their franking credit refund is greedier and more selfish than the most obnoxious snout-in-the-trough politician, and doesn't deserve to be supported by taxpayers.

    Pensions SHOULD be paid to all long-term Australian residents over qualifying age, but as long as they are means tested, we should all support the premise that the needy should be cared for first and foremost. Savers should be treated fairly and with respect, and those who manipulate to claim more than is fair ARE STINKING LEANERS and should be called out for their greed. And we need to UNITE to fight for fair, though sadly those benefiting from unfair will NEVER stand for either fairness or a better deal for those in real need.

    Stop the defamatory lies, Sundays. I know you hate that I expose the dishonesty and unfairness of your precious ALP mates, but that doesn't excuse your untruths, bullying and abuse.

    Trebor, please stop whining about bad luck. I had it in bucket loads. The fact that I and others who were cursed with it successfully fought back should not be grounds to now condemn us to unfair hardship. What we need I in this country is a return to human decency and personal responsibility - recognizing that reward for endeavour builds the prosperity that allows and encourages greater charity and kindness.
    tisme
    7th Mar 2019
    10:16am
    how personally responsible can carers be who have spent years looking after often more than one family member aged/frail/disabled only to find by the time that time is over ( if it ever is ) that you too old and damaged to work and to close to retirement to save for it many face homelessness
    TREBOR
    7th Mar 2019
    11:35am
    Fair point. Nobody offers them a hugely preferential superannuation system or a fat cheque tax-free.
    TREBOR
    7th Mar 2019
    1:49pm
    KSS will tell you that's your absolute choice.... so let him foot the bill instead of your doing it... let the government tax everyone to death to make up the shortfall .....

    None so blind....
    MICK
    7th Mar 2019
    10:23am
    If any of us think either side of politics sees us other than a target then I respectfully suggest they are dreaming. The problem with working for a lifetime and building up assets is the same as the huge superannuation pool. Both sides of politics believe it is their God given right to plunder what we have put away for our retirements.
    There will come a day that we all need to abandon both sides and vote in sympathetic Independents who are not controlled by the big end of town. In the meantime I look forward to the removal of the current dictatorship in forming and the restoration of some semblance of democracy.
    Anonymous
    7th Mar 2019
    10:29am
    Only plundering I see is by labor , first introducing asset tests , then easing retirement age to 67, now taking away income from SFR’s earning $20-60k
    tisme
    7th Mar 2019
    10:30am
    I dream of the day when every one or at least millions leave their ballot papers blank or fill the boxes with the same number wouldn't that be the start of showing the polies we aren't gonna take their crap anymore
    MICK
    7th Mar 2019
    11:02am
    They'll revel if we do that tisme. What they hate is to be shown the door.

    I've pushed the 'Independents' wagon for many years as I watched the behaviour of both sides. Whilst I advocate voting Labor, no matter who you normally vote for, on THIS OCCASION I only advocate this to rid us of the current cancer trying to turn the nation into a dictatorship by stealth. Labor's days need to be up if they do not perform and Independents is the way to democracy proof our system of government.
    Time will tell if people are sheep or use the ballot box to not enslave themselves. Life in American should be the obvious wake-up call as none of us want us to become like this country.....which the top end of society has been pushing hard to duplicate for decades.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    7th Mar 2019
    11:33am
    The LNP had gouged pensioners & will only gouge more money to feed themselves & their greedy top end of town mates.
    As you say Mick, independant is really the only way to go because the ALP aren't really listening but are by far a better alternative than the greedy LNP.
    Maybe a universal pension is the way to go for ALL those aged 65 & above. Billions will be saved in admin costs & tax paid by those that can well afford it.
    FC can go to start with.
    TREBOR
    7th Mar 2019
    11:47am
    I posted figures on the super pile - no wonder these dogs are slavering at the idea of getting their hands on it - why no lesser a stellar light than Peter Costalot was tapped as a potential head honcho for a government taken-over super fund... dread the thought given his track record of pillaging the treasury for the Future fund etc.

    ONLY if that super pile was out of the hands of governments and of their mates would it be worththe change.

    On another note - it is truly astounding that the current pile:-

    "Superannuation assets totaled $2.7 trillion at the end of the December 2018 quarter. Over the 12 months from December 2017 there was a 1.3 per cent increase in total superannuation assets."

    https://www.superannuation.asn.au/resources/superannuation-statistics

    ... is incapable of providing well for all its contributors.

    Hearkening back to the good old Menzies concept - that amount deposited into the national retirement funding concept would provide for a good income for all in retirement.

    $2.7 trillion - no wonder Costalot and Co want to roll it over into a government fund... or rather make it roll over .....

    Side-note - imagine if that 9% of gross incomes had been deposited into a Future Fund for all, and included some contributions from the resources boom (now a bust due to inept management and blatant robbery via offshoring, but who's quibbling about Banana Republicanism?)

    Economic illiterates would be the right term for both major parties ...
    ozrog
    7th Mar 2019
    10:46am
    The pension should be the defined average wage. So many though no fault of there own have no super and rely on the pension totally.
    jackie
    7th Mar 2019
    11:24am
    ozrog...I agree. It makes me sick so many wealthy elderly that hide their assets to get a pension to complain about those less fortunate than them.
    TREBOR
    7th Mar 2019
    12:01pm
    Interesting, ozrog... I'm working on the concept that any returned service person should at least receive minimum wage as a guarantee - they often find it very hard, particularly nowadays, to find a decent job and often suffer what I'm labeling PSSD (Post Service Separation Syndrome - another of my ideas) which is what occurs when a person used to a certain way of life is suddenly dumped into a maelstrom of competing chaos - such as our modern 'society'. This happens to some extent to every person who retires - my rule of thumb being that it takes a minimum of two years to settle (get your mind right) - but is much more powerful in those who have been in a clearly organised situation such as services. Particularly those with active service are affected by a sudden loss of their organised life, and often have other issues to deal with as well.

    Anyway - the concept of a minimum payment was part of my thinking, as yours above - AWE sounds a bit high, but I'm open to argument.
    TREBOR
    7th Mar 2019
    12:06pm
    Yes, jackie - as someone said above, abolition of the assets part and reliance on income would change the field somewhat, and yesterday Lothario and someone else took up the cudgels for the family home in assets (again - snores) - at that time I said it would be impossible to police actual pouring of cash into home etc.. so how do you handle it?

    Force everyone to keep all their reno records for ten years before retirement? Dictate that people cannot sell up and upsize prior to retirement?

    Too complicated and fraught with dangers - and besides - there aren't that many who actually do that. People like the ex and I are actually down-sizing, but due to the limitations placed on residence by her disabilities, we are spending more than sale price - then there are renos to suit disability - how do you police that and arbitrarily say that person has spent down to get something for free?

    It would be an endless argument.

    Better the Trebor Scheme of universal pension and income tax on all income and side benefits above...
    Captain
    7th Mar 2019
    2:47pm
    Trebor, what happens when someone sells the property they lived in for 40 years then decided to sell up, move further out (because when they bought it was outer, outer metro). The new place was cheaper than the one they sold, but just a few short years later, the new residence is worth more than the old one they sold!!!
    TREBOR
    7th Mar 2019
    5:37pm
    That's one reason I oppose including the family home - and steer clear of agreeing with regard to the 'big spenders' who reno their home to get a pension. It's unenforceable and not really relevant, and that move to include only the fat cats is cover for including all homes in the assets test.

    Another reason it is unenforceable is the vast disparity in housing prices in different areas... just cannot work.

    Not far from where I live is a (wait for it) seven storey residence with pool and whole floor dedicated to entertainment and so forth, from which you can watch the fireworks in Port Stephens - it sold for $1.2m - that would buy you a shack in Sydney in most areas.
    OlderandWiser
    10th Mar 2019
    6:11pm
    Captain, many who sold up and moved to smaller homes in order to retire self-funded and not burden the taxpayer are now being threatened by Labor with the loss of a massive chunk of their income as punishment for looking after the interests of pensioners and the national treasury. Shocking to see so many selfish people endorsing that unfairness.
    OlderandWiser
    10th Mar 2019
    6:11pm
    Captain, many who sold up and moved to smaller homes in order to retire self-funded and not burden the taxpayer are now being threatened by Labor with the loss of a massive chunk of their income as punishment for looking after the interests of pensioners and the national treasury. Shocking to see so many selfish people endorsing that unfairness.
    Misty
    7th Mar 2019
    11:28am
    This topic is like a Merry go Round, same old arguments, same comments from the same people, nothing changes.
    Paddington
    7th Mar 2019
    3:31pm
    Agree Misty!
    Other topics as well! Need some new bloood methinks.
    Foxy
    7th Mar 2019
    4:10pm
    ... exactly! Same old same old .............y a w n s
    Sundays
    7th Mar 2019
    5:09pm
    A site where terms like Leaners was banned and posts on the same topic by the same people reduced. Where trolls were called out for what they are. Restore healthy debate
    OlderandWiser
    10th Mar 2019
    6:43pm
    And let the Labor trolls lie unchecked and bully anyone who disagrees with their socialist BS;.
    OlderandWiser
    10th Mar 2019
    6:43pm
    And let the Labor trolls lie unchecked and bully anyone who disagrees with their socialist BS;.
    Spondonian
    7th Mar 2019
    11:34am
    All present pensioners should get the pension , they could not build up a Superfund before they retired . No asset or income tests because they are totaly unfair . Just because some decide to for go holidays , booze , buying a house etc they should not be penalised to support those that decide to spend everything knowing they will be supported later . When we came to Australia 34yrs ogo we were told that we would get a pension when we retired but since it wasnt very much we should save to provide a better life style on top of it . This we did , working 60 plus hours a week and saving . Now we have too much assetts and get no pension but our earnings from our assetts only just beat the pension rate . If had time again would live life and stuff the savings .
    TREBOR
    7th Mar 2019
    12:07pm
    Looxury! A mere 60 hours a week... regular jailer's pet, you are! I was a 24/7/365 for most of my working life...
    Rae
    8th Mar 2019
    6:57am
    Yes in just6 years our politicians from all parties have managed to destroy superannuation and any saving for the bottom 80% of workers. Incompetence plus.

    It makes absolutely no sense to delay gratification to save if those who don't are the ones being rewarded at the end of the working life.
    BigAl
    7th Mar 2019
    11:47am
    Have to agree with Older and wiser. Well written. I worked 45 years straight 50-60 hours a week. Haven't gotten any welfare payments or pension because I am considered "rich". A lot of people get caught up with drink, drugs and gambling but that's their choice and they end up at the end of their lives with nothing. Who should they blame. You have to be stupid not to have a great life in Australia. I would like to take a lot of whinging Australians up to the back blocks of Asia where I used to work to show them what real hardship and poverty is. The more we pander to welfare the weaker Australian society is becoming. the figures are staggering: 8 M on some sort of welfare, 2 M alcoholics, 2 M addicted to gambling, 2 M on disability pensions or NDIS, 200 000 ice addicts, 8 M with chronic illness, millions obese and so on, 25% of kids depressed - very sad. There simply will not be enough welfare to help sort out all these problems. The only solution is life skills education (budgeting, investing, relationships, conflict resolution, health, nutrition, thinking and goal setting etc etc) has to be the core curriculum of the school system from kindergarten to completion of university. No kid should advance until he passes the skills tests.
    TREBOR
    7th Mar 2019
    12:07pm
    Looxury! A mere 60 hours a week... regular jailer's pet, you are! I was a 24/7/365 for most of my working life...
    TREBOR
    7th Mar 2019
    12:11pm
    We don't live in Asia... sorry 'bout that.... but there is this nice lass in Hanoi.....

    Anyway - define 'welfare' - you mean pollie's preferential super, childcare, PPL, PS super, company tax concessions, trust and family company tax dodges, family benefit.........

    Unemployment Benefits and OAP and DSP etc are not welfare... they're covered under the title Social Security ............ (come in spinners)....
    Sundays
    7th Mar 2019
    12:23pm
    Big Al, teaching life skills especially financial is a good idea but none of your ideas will help the very poor in Asia. We don’t have corrupt governments. This is not the way we want to treat people in Australia, rather we try to assist and yes some policies work better than others.

    You dont qualify for a pension, good for you. Think about it, your hard work paid off with a little luck along the way. Enjoy your retirement fortunate that you don’t have to stand in the supermarket wondering if you can afford everything you need
    clarkey
    7th Mar 2019
    1:11pm
    Very many here are forgetting the 2008 GFC. I lost $500k (my retirement fund)when that hit our shores. Wiped out my non reliance on the PENSION. I am now on a part pension but burning my savings at a fast rate. I have never gambled and gave up drinking (which was bugger all) when my wife was stricken with cancer and later died. I hate relying on the pension and would love to tell the government to shove it! Unfortunately I cannot and with the ever increasing costs of all insurances every year including private health cover it will not be long before I rely totally on the pension. I am not being a bleeding heart but trying to explain that not all pensioners want to be there or intended being on the full pension. I don't want sympathy, what happened to me happened to many others. I would just like to see the more well off show some sympathy, empathy and stop generalizing about the people who rely on a full pension. People who never had the opportunity to start super at their first job, people who did not gamble, smoke or drink alcohol but had never been given the opportunity to save, people who came from low educated families who did not have a sense of finance or learnt about finance. I am over the well off lambasting the lower socio economic classes because they rely on the PENSION. A PENSION that imo is well below the poverty line.
    Triss
    7th Mar 2019
    1:21pm
    I agree with you absolutely, clarkey.
    Triss
    7th Mar 2019
    1:25pm
    We do have corrupt government, Sundays, that’s the reason politicians like Julie Bishop retire on over $200,000 plus perks and extras and pensioners are peeled to the bone and struggling.
    Grateful
    7th Mar 2019
    1:33pm
    Trebor. You say that the OAP is not welfare as they are "covered under the title of "Social Security"
    What "security" is offered to those unfortunate to be "living in poverty"?
    That's why they changed the name from the Department of Social Security to Centrelink, because they realized that it was a gross misnomer, as so many who SHOULD have been provided with basic social security, were simply not getting it and still don't.
    THAT is the question here, how do we stop older Australians, regardless of the cause, from "living in poverty".
    Let's concentrate on THE subject and leave all other issues for another forum.
    This problem needs action now and we have the opportunity of getting something addressed with an election in just 10 weeks time!!
    TREBOR
    7th Mar 2019
    1:54pm
    I am fully aware of your position there, Grateful....

    I simply rectify the misapprehension promoted by some that receiving Social Security is 'welfare' - if I want 'welfare' I can go to the Salvos for help paying the lecco bill. Regardless of the name change, the issue of Social Security is still listed in Parliament under Social Security - not that pejorative term 'welfare'.

    Far greater concern needs to be applied to tax bludgers than to dole bludgers...
    Sundays
    7th Mar 2019
    2:01pm
    Yes, agree Triss. Compared to places like Asia and parts of Africa where the rich can live obscenely and the poor starve, where corruption is rife and even the aid sent by foreign countries does not reach the poor Australia is still relatively prosperous.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    7th Mar 2019
    2:22pm
    Australia is more than 6 times more corrupt than NZ fact, we may not be as corrupt as a lot of countries but we are heading that way.
    sunnyOz
    7th Mar 2019
    2:40pm
    Agree with Clarkey - I too am on single OAP and no matter how hard I budget and scrimp and save, I am going backwards far quicker. The latest pension increase of $9.90 per f/n does not even come close to increases just to live. My rates have increased $6.20 per f/n. My health insurance went up $5.35 per f/n. Insurance for my house, even with lowering the excess, has increased by $11.50 per f/n! So all ready I am behind the eight ball. These increases can keep on climbing, but eventually will come the time when you cannot get blood out of fresh air.
    Triss
    7th Mar 2019
    3:15pm
    I would really like to see the next round of pollies’ salaries go up $10.00, sunnyOz, and hear their comments, I think it would be quite enlightening.
    TREBOR
    7th Mar 2019
    9:55pm
    Grateful - in those circumstances, it remains Social Security, since it provides a backup and a right... whether or not it is a sufficient backup is another question.

    That is what we are arguing here...

    Some here seem to think that people have all lived on a healthy plateau where they can simply 'choose' to save or spend, so if you have not sufficient at the end of the day - obviously you chose to spend etc, and are therefore a 'leaner'.

    Many people cannot 'choose' to save or spend during their lifetime - they often live from hand to mouth,and that has nothing to do with wasteful or profligate spending, since there are countless factors that can put a person in that position in life, including failure of a 'choice' of an investment that goes wrong for countless reasons, sometimes over and over again. You can be as thrifty as you like and sometimes things will fail through no fault of your own - and we have several here in that situation.

    Only a person who has never lived below that plateau would suggest that choice is infinite for the many. **rolls eyes**
    Sundays
    7th Mar 2019
    11:47am
    I’m not sure how only deeming income would work. Income from Assets can be manipulated to a small amount which was why the Asset test was introduced in the first place. Are we also talking about deeming the value of the family home, so people don’t over invest in housing. I can see more manipulation and unfairness with this proposal
    TREBOR
    7th Mar 2019
    12:13pm
    Perhaps the only solution to over-capitalising a home to get pension is to apply a mandatory price for a home in a specific area. Then how do you ascertain which is which among houses? Pay real estate agents to give a price on market?

    I doubt the vast majority have the money required to do that anyway....
    Sundays
    7th Mar 2019
    12:26pm
    Trebor, people would just give the home to their kids 5 years before retirement. This strategy already being used by farmers, passing the farm on and qualifying for a pension
    TREBOR
    7th Mar 2019
    1:59pm
    Yes - always plenty of outs once you impose a regimen on people. Hmmm ... with the often savage restrictions on farmers sub-dividing so as to have the son/daughter living on the property and ready to take it over fully trained etc, farmers have been forced to find a better way. Unless it's been changed, farmers could not, for example, set aside a five acre plot, which is below pension asset limit, as sub-division and then live on it themselves, or have a family member live there ready to take over.

    Not a good long-term solution to the crisis in real farming.... and of farm families staying on the land to produce ... easier for the offspring to head for the city and become doctors and lawyers and such..
    Rae
    8th Mar 2019
    7:05am
    If the tax system was sorted out and a universal pension paid to all then the upgrading home after home wouldn't be so rewarding. At the moment it is those who do this gaining wealth to pass on while receiving all the benefits of our Social Security system.

    Those investing in income earning assets are being denied any benefits. That sort of discrimination causes changes in decision making because it compromises the consequences.

    Savers should benefit from the effort not be penalised.
    Cheezil61
    7th Mar 2019
    12:08pm
    Election PROMISES win votes even when the voters KNOW they will be BROKEN promises after the election! Vote informal & see what happens? Ditch them all regardless of what party they represent!! They are ALL liars & thieves, lying to us & thieving from hard working battlers! Wake up!
    TREBOR
    7th Mar 2019
    12:18pm
    Non-core.. non-core.. encore for the non-core....

    A great source of humour was our Wee Johnnie Howard... 'core and non-core promises'... **rolls about laughing**..

    I await breathlessly the arrival of the 'budget emergency' or similar once either party in The Tag Team takes office..... and throws their hands in the air, saying there are these endless Black Holes in the Budget that the 'other side' never 'revealed' - and we just can't keep all our promises right now - we'll try them on again just before the next election after you've had plenty of curry handed to you to help you forget we made them now ...
    johninmelb
    7th Mar 2019
    12:18pm
    Slow news day at YLC, so let's revisit Pensions so we can rehash all the stuff we've said before over and over again.

    Nothing has changed in all the years YLC has been rehashing this topic. Why is it so?

    Remember Einstein's definition of insanity. Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. YLC is a perfect example.
    TREBOR
    7th Mar 2019
    12:18pm
    Double the pension NOW - and double double pension for those who are carers....

    (an ambent claim but you have to start somewhere)....
    Charlie
    7th Mar 2019
    12:27pm
    I see a lot of money going into homeless youth but nothing earmarked for units where the elderly can live in peaceful and in comfortable conditions.

    One thing I remember about my youth is that I didn't have much, but I didn't need much to survive and feel good.

    As long as age pensioners have to rent, under the same market conditions as everyone else and have "rental assistance" less than $100 a week, there will always be a case for an increase in age pension.
    KSS
    7th Mar 2019
    12:47pm
    Twice a year (or more) pensioners get a 'rise' and twice a year (or more) we get this article!
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    7th Mar 2019
    1:05pm
    And twice a year or more retirees are ripped off & gouged by the greedy LNP.
    OlderandWiser
    10th Mar 2019
    6:40pm
    And now Labor wants to gouge everyone and create a party for the rich, paid for by the rest of us.
    OlderandWiser
    10th Mar 2019
    6:40pm
    And now Labor wants to gouge everyone and create a party for the rich, paid for by the rest of us.
    Triss
    7th Mar 2019
    1:08pm
    A lot of people here are so sure they are right, “work hard, live carefully, put money away and you’ll have enough to retire on. In their own circumstances obviously they are right but they need to get rid of that tunnel vision and realise that there are dozens/hundreds of people who would have loved to be in that position. People who had handicapped children or who became handicapped themselves, people in a job that wasn’t well paid, late life divorces, late life redundancy, chronic illness, suddenly need to leave a job in order to become a carer. Think before you sneer at others.
    Triss
    7th Mar 2019
    1:29pm
    Oops sorry, I didn’t notice this post appeared twice. Senior slip.
    TREBOR
    7th Mar 2019
    2:01pm
    Divorce and asset stripping at the time when you are supposed to be lining the coffers for retirement, not starting again with next to nothing.
    TREBOR
    7th Mar 2019
    11:01pm
    .. and don't you dare suffer injury or fall ill at 50 or so......
    GeorgeM
    9th Mar 2019
    12:18am
    Good comments, Triss. Add also things like - company was shut down while you were doing well, industry / company work was outsourced to China / India, etc, so (as per Keating) you can buy cheaper goods here, and when you look for jobs - hey, you are not the right colour, age or even sex! Some have been LUCKY never to experience any of these or most of these situations, or maybe only one or two times (from which you could recover), not several of these or multiple times! Insensitive / immature / "lucky" people find this all hard to digest.
    Triss
    7th Mar 2019
    1:08pm
    A lot of people here are so sure they are right, “work hard, live carefully, put money away and you’ll have enough to retire on. In their own circumstances obviously they are right but they need to get rid of that tunnel vision and realise that there are dozens/hundreds of people who would have loved to be in that position. People who had handicapped children or who became handicapped themselves, people in a job that wasn’t well paid, late life divorces, late life redundancy, chronic illness, suddenly need to leave a job in order to become a carer. Think before you sneer at others.
    JB
    7th Mar 2019
    2:31pm
    Spot on . As they say don’t judge till you have walked in my shoes . It’s easy to criticize when others live in ivory towers . If you doing well that’s great but please don’t sit back and judge when you have no idea what others are dealing with or have had to deal with
    inextratime
    7th Mar 2019
    2:33pm
    Absolutely Triss. It's not a case of one size fits all.
    inextratime
    7th Mar 2019
    2:33pm
    Absolutely Triss. It's not a case of one size fits all.
    Paddington
    7th Mar 2019
    3:45pm
    Definitely! You covered most examples of people having no control over their lives.
    We were renting years back between houses after moving interstate. The house we were renting sold which was out of our price range and a young couple purchased it. He became ill later with chronic fatigue, a very misnamed illness, and was unable to work. So sad! They had to sell.
    OlderandWiser
    10th Mar 2019
    6:54pm
    That works both ways, folks. Perhaps those who continue to abuse and falsely accuse others of 'rorting' and endorse the Labor Party's unfair attack should walk in the shoes of those they are condemning and consider the possibility that their lives weren't easy, and they didn't have much if any 'luck', much less enjoy tax benefits, but might have worked very hard, gone without a lot, or downsized their home to self-fund their retirement, and taking their income is CRUEL AND DISGUSTING.

    Do you seriously think that supporting unfairness to others helps your cause? Why SHOULD they be empathetic and respectful when you are NOT?

    We would all do better to stand together. None of us had control over our lives. Some of us pulled ourselves up after being knocked down and tried a lot harder. Others stayed down and cried for sympathy and handouts. Some did their best but genuinely couldn't get up again. Others got up only to be knocked down again and again and again. In the end, nobody is qualified to judge ANYONE, so stop judging those you THINK have been more fortunate and supporting unfairness to them, and I predict you will find they will respond with a far nicer attitude toward you.

    I have been the champion of the underdog, but frankly the abuse and unfairness of those supporting Labor's unfair attack on the livelihood of people like me has changed my disposition. I find it very hard to be sympathetic to people who support the destruction of my income based on their WRONG AND NASTY ASSUMPTIONS that somehow I must deserve hurt and they deserve reward.
    patty
    7th Mar 2019
    1:34pm
    i worked for 43 years from the age 14 years only had super for about 15 years, so it is very hard to live on the pension and when i moved in with my partner we losted 400.00 dollars between us and our rent went up 100.00 dollars so that doesn't seem very fair
    Triss
    7th Mar 2019
    2:21pm
    Which underlines my opinion, patty, of a corrupt government because if you’d been a politician you would only have had to work for 8 years to be given a lifetime pension. Also you would not have lost any of it when moving in with your partner. And your partner would take over a percentage of your pension should you topple off the twig first.
    Knows-a-lot
    7th Mar 2019
    2:40pm
    "Many age pensioners are heading into winter knowing that half the time they will have to choose between eating and turning on their heaters. These are the pensioners who need real change, not small change."

    Labor will deliver that real change.
    floss
    7th Mar 2019
    2:56pm
    After being done over by Joe Hockey i have no more pension worries,we will not forget on election day.
    TREBOR
    7th Mar 2019
    10:03pm
    A clear example of a person being thrifty and still losing through no fault of their own...

    FTR - for most of my life I neither smoked nor drank and certainly never gambled.... and was a solid worker up to 18 hours a day.... as I said (thanks Clint Eastwood) deserving ain't got nothing to do with it... and in the case of many, you can thank the 'social revolution' since the 1970's and the concurrent demise of intelligence and insight in the 'manager' class for the majority of the problems facing the many today.

    Now then - let's get rid of the welfare for house hoarders, PPL, childcare subsidies, first home owners, concessional capital gains, and such.. no more sweet ride for shareholders... you pay tax on what you earn.... abolish franked dividends first off ... bring all super funds under one roof as far removed from politicians and other parasites as possible, and then treat everyone the same, with an upper limit on how much you can salt away into super... no more sweet concessions for business that doesn't even manage, year after year, to pay the 30% on net income.... wouldn't Jo and Joe Toiler love to be able to write their income tax down to 12% in most cases!!
    Rae
    8th Mar 2019
    7:36am
    Yes TREBOR I'd suggest do away with Super too and use the concessions to pay everyone a universal pension. Leave saving up to the individual and tax income fairly.
    Alexii
    7th Mar 2019
    2:58pm
    So with the increase and as I'm on a part pension I'll be able to buy an extra cup of coffee from 711 for $1 or Shell for 80cents. Wow, I'm lucky! I'll lash out at the end of March.
    Rae
    8th Mar 2019
    7:38am
    Why on earth would you waste money buying cheap coffee from slave labour owners?

    That $1 is 5% of my weekly electricity bill.
    Bren
    7th Mar 2019
    2:59pm
    Just nitpicking about the statement that the base rate hasn't increased since 2009 : I think whenever the pension increases it is generally composed of an increase to both the base rate and the pension supplement (the energy supplement has been frozen at $14.10).


    For example the $9.90 increase just announced comprises an increase of $9.20 to the base rate and of $0.70 to the supplement.
    Bren
    7th Mar 2019
    2:59pm
    Just nitpicking about the statement that the base rate hasn't increased since 2009 : I think whenever the pension increases it is generally composed of an increase to both the base rate and the pension supplement (the energy supplement has been frozen at $14.10).


    For example the $9.90 increase just announced comprises an increase of $9.20 to the base rate and of $0.70 to the supplement.
    floss
    7th Mar 2019
    3:00pm
    Lothario where is your twin he had more brains then you.
    TREBOR
    7th Mar 2019
    11:02pm
    A fine figure of two men these days, our Lothario.

    Lothario II is here somewhere....
    Aviator
    8th Mar 2019
    12:24am
    The lefty leaners are out in force, wanting more handouts?
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    8th Mar 2019
    12:39am
    The LNP trolls want ALL retirees wealth, my research indicates the left just want a fair go for retirees & pensioners including SFR & for big business & wealthy people to be made to pay at least their fair share instead of always looking for ways to not pay taxes, sometimes for years with the blessing of the current LNP government
    OlderandWiser
    10th Mar 2019
    6:00pm
    That SHOULD be the aim, Lothario (? - whichever Lothario posted last!). But the ALP just want to strip poorer SFRs of everything, close the doors to wealth-building for battlers, remove all the benefit of saving, and feed the rich whose high incomes enable them to either soak up franking credits or move to offshore or capital-focused investments.

    Blue chip shares were traditionally the best way for battlers to build a nest egg, but Labor wants to close that opportunity.

    If franking credits are tax in the hands of a high income earner, and claimable as a tax credit, how can that exact same deduction from dividends NOT be tax and refundable to a low income earner? How does tax suddenly become a rort because a poorer man pays it? How is it fair to tax a low income earner at 15 or 30% more than his'/her marginal rate just because the income comes from shares, when the high income earner is taxed fairly regardless of income source?

    Yes, there is an issue with high income earners declaring low taxable income, but beating up on genuine low income earners isn't a solution. When it comes to super, the ATO knows EXACTLY what income is received - so tax the REAL income fairly! Outside of super, address the loopholes that allow people to artificially reduce their declared income, BUT DON'T ROB THE GENUINE BATTLERS IN THE PRETENCE OF ADDRESSING A CLAIMED RORT, WHILE STILL LETTING THE WEALTHY ENJOY THEIR GENEROUS BENEFIT.
    OlderandWiser
    10th Mar 2019
    6:00pm
    That SHOULD be the aim, Lothario (? - whichever Lothario posted last!). But the ALP just want to strip poorer SFRs of everything, close the doors to wealth-building for battlers, remove all the benefit of saving, and feed the rich whose high incomes enable them to either soak up franking credits or move to offshore or capital-focused investments.

    Blue chip shares were traditionally the best way for battlers to build a nest egg, but Labor wants to close that opportunity.

    If franking credits are tax in the hands of a high income earner, and claimable as a tax credit, how can that exact same deduction from dividends NOT be tax and refundable to a low income earner? How does tax suddenly become a rort because a poorer man pays it? How is it fair to tax a low income earner at 15 or 30% more than his'/her marginal rate just because the income comes from shares, when the high income earner is taxed fairly regardless of income source?

    Yes, there is an issue with high income earners declaring low taxable income, but beating up on genuine low income earners isn't a solution. When it comes to super, the ATO knows EXACTLY what income is received - so tax the REAL income fairly! Outside of super, address the loopholes that allow people to artificially reduce their declared income, BUT DON'T ROB THE GENUINE BATTLERS IN THE PRETENCE OF ADDRESSING A CLAIMED RORT, WHILE STILL LETTING THE WEALTHY ENJOY THEIR GENEROUS BENEFIT.
    patti
    7th Mar 2019
    3:55pm
    You can't just look at income amount. You also need to look at expenditure. I would spend more on mortgage payments and home maintenance, plus living costs, than someone who rents in many cases. But I am not entitled to any assistance. If I rented I would receive rent assistance and have home repairs taken care of. I only receive the Age Pension, no other income. Need to be aware of circumstances before making assumptions.
    GrayComputing
    7th Mar 2019
    4:26pm
    We have giant government money sucking monster called Centrelink.
    Getting rid of most of its work load will save billions.

    NO ASSET TEST FOR A PENSION EVER AGAIN!
    A pension is not welfare.

    Now is the season for discontent, so do something about it!
    It is time to kill off this insane hugely expensive pensioner whacking bureaucracy.

    It is time for all of us (yes that means you) to rant at our MPs and Senators daily to take action for human decency and a huge stress reduction for pensioners

    NO ASSET TEST FOR A PENSION EVER AGAIN!
    A pension is not welfare.

    Most economist say we will save taxpayers money by dropping asset testing because of the massive overheads cost in running Centrelink and the 10,000 conflicting rules.

    Hiring more Centrelink staff will only increase taxpayer’s costs for processing the creeping insane red tape monster system politicians and well paid bureaucrats have created.

    Help scrap it now. Become a hero.

    Even poorer New Zealand has a NO ASSET pension so it is cheaper and user friendly.

    Why worry that few million$ earners get it too. That is peanuts to them, not enough for a good vintage champagne.

    Do retired and retiring people really look forward and want 100++ visits to/from Centrelink and be part of 3 million waiting queues and lost calls?

    We all (that means you) need to tell our MP and senators every day that these criminal asset tests for a pension must be dropped now.
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    8th Mar 2019
    12:41am
    Totally agree 100% mate, a big thumbs up. Keep it coming so everyone knows what to do come election time
    GeorgeM
    9th Mar 2019
    12:19am
    Good timing for these comments.
    Blinky
    7th Mar 2019
    6:21pm
    Australian politicians should STOP thinking that pensioners must live in poverty, in old, cheap houses and, hence, in cheap suburbs. That is not the Australia we'd like to see. If u r a pensioner who relies on the govt pension, it's cause u r not rich, n u need assistance from the Govt in your old age, after having worked n paid taxes while u worked.
    Govts throw millions n even billiion of dollars onto helping refugees, asylum seekers n other foreigners who need help. Well, if we cannot afford to provide a PROPER AND FAIR PENSION TO AUSTRALIANS, perhaps we should reduce foreign aid n the millions we spend on immigration n other so-called "humanitarian grounds."
    CHARITY STARTS AT HOME, you know?
    Any political party that understands this n is prepared to provide a decent n proper pension system will be sure to get the vote of ALL pensioners.
    TREBOR
    7th Mar 2019
    10:05pm
    $5Bn to keep refugee claimants on Nauru and Maniac Island - someone said yesterday they could have put them up in a fine hotel and paid 16,000 of them the dole for life with that amount.
    Triss
    8th Mar 2019
    12:10am
    Yes, Trebor, pollies don’t seem to have a clue or care about intelligent money management.
    Rae
    8th Mar 2019
    7:49am
    TREBOR they could have opened a UNHRC camp on land and put them in the queue for resettlement anywhere the UN says like all the other millions of refugees. That would have made paying $10 000 and risking drowning a waste of time and money.

    Would have been cheaper and also solved the flying in on planes asylum seeking issue too.

    Get in the queue and wait your turn like everyone else has to.
    travelman
    7th Mar 2019
    7:37pm
    A real increase in Pensions is about 8 years overdue. Pensioners need a substantial increase just to be able to get them up to a poverty level of income. Before any dim-wit tells me that the pension is a hand out - let me tell to your to think before you start running off at the mouth. There is a large number of pensioners (those born just before the Second World war and those who had reached retirement age just before the introduction of superannuation. before superannuation all those working and paying taxes also contributed towards their pensions; it was taken out of their wage with their tax. The contribution towards pension was calculated to provide an income that they could live on for a calculated average number of years. Some would live longer than the calculated period and others would live shorter than the calculated period thus the funds would meet the demand. The contributions were the responsibility of a government to invest to increase the 'pool' of money held as a Pension Fund. However, we did have one Prime Minister, I wont name him, who had the money released into general public funds and to be used to boost the economy to cover a recession that was looming over the 'horizon'. Naturally, this created a large hole in the Pension Fund that couldn't be filled from the general public fund. It was decided that a Superannuation Scheme would be introduced so as to relieve a government from having to manage a pension fund. The Superannuation was created and operated much the same in principle to the Pension Fund with the exception that the employer would contribute. Both Employer and employee would contribute an amount each to an account in the name of he employee. Theses amounts would be pooled into a Superannuation Fund and invested, not all in one investment but into two investment sources. You all know that of course. I am sure the government paid into the Pension Fund the full amount of what was owed and accrued amounts, into the Pension Fund up to the start of the Superannuation Scheme. The Pension Fund was then 'wound up' and each person's accumulated total saved was then transferred into the Superannuation Scheme. As I was not far from retiring at the beginning of the Superannuation Scheme there was a lot of money to transfer but not much Superannuation deposits made. So pensioners are not receiving a handout, only what they put into, from the systems Pension Fund and Superannuation. It is wrong and an insult to tell them they are getting a handout. Now, we must also understand they are disadvantaged because thy fell between two systems, on the one hand only able to receive a pension (not an investment - just a set amount from the government) and on the other hand not being able to get the benefit of the superannuation fund due to age of retirement not far away. Those on superannuation and have been on it for some time and getting a good a good retirement income, should spend a moment to think of those less fortunate, not of their own hand, but at the hand of a system.
    TREBOR
    7th Mar 2019
    10:11pm
    It would help if the idiots in Parliament would actually allow the superannuation system to work through a 'life' of fifty years before they start whining about how much pensions etc are going to cost now.

    They only do this for ideological and political reasons... the 'right' since they believe with all their non-hearts that pensions are a welfare handout that is just not acceptable and the old ladies can just expire in the streets for all they care, and the left because they, like St Julia, cannot add up and are too busy with their Brave New World of their never-ending uni quadrangle revolution to suit those who wine loudest but have never raised a shovel in their life.

    Pension age back to 65.... then settle down and actually work out some figures on how well superannuation will be working in 2050 or so, not how much pensions - at today's rate and numbers - will 'cost' at that time.

    Not bloody hard... but these clowns must play politics and try to get at each other and keep the people running after them instead of lolly-gagging in that warm sun and actually enjoying life.

    Kick the lot out and start again - ban parties and ban donations to parties.
    Triss
    8th Mar 2019
    12:13am
    Yes, Trebor, an intensive declutter of all parts of gvt is well overdue.
    Aviator
    8th Mar 2019
    12:27am
    Time to declutter the labor cesspool. Nothing wrong with the LNP
    OnlyGenuineRainey
    8th Mar 2019
    12:42am
    Sorry, should of been LNP cesspool, Labor I believe are getting it right.
    OlderandWiser
    10th Mar 2019
    6:37pm
    More accurate the first time, Lothario - but only in sentence one. Lots wrong with the LNP, but the Labor cesspool is far worse. Labor can't get anything right, and don't even try to.
    Aviator
    11th Mar 2019
    8:08pm
    Universal pension, yikes, the leaners are after more handouts
    Grateful
    8th Mar 2019
    9:42am
    Isn't THIS supposed to be what this discussion is all about???
    Do you think the Age Pension should become an election issue? Do you have an idea to solve pension poverty?
    The type of answers that we are seeing is EXACTLY WHY our pension system is so messed up and why we have so many age pensioners living in poverty.
    Governments just love to see so much disconnect between the age pensioners themselves,when they start arguing about politics and leaners and welfare and entitlements and bludgers and working 24 /7 while others pee their wages up against a wall etc etc. Politicians LOVE to see those arguments!!!
    Don't you all know that saying "UNITED we STAND, DIVIDED we FALL!!!!
    Keep this up and NOTHING will happen, AGAIN!!!
    GeorgeM
    9th Mar 2019
    12:23am
    Exactly....as I have often said! 3 Million+ Retirees need to join in together and DEMAND Universal Age Pension (at Age 65 years and Residency of say 15 years) with NO other tests, from their MPs NOW, and vote them OUT if they don't agree. Our strength in numbers is great, and will make a difference (definitely in marginal seats), if only people will ignore the party trolls and get united.
    johninmelb
    9th Mar 2019
    7:52pm
    George M.

    That is a fantastic idea, and the best thing I have read on this page of drivel so far.

    Now, tell us what you are doing to drive this proposal through.

    Merely mentioning it here on YLC means nothing. Tell us what you have done so far, what you intend to do in the coming months, and your detailed plan to get everyone on board and get this through the parliament.

    ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS.
    Poppy
    8th Mar 2019
    10:54am
    I noticed that all the real estate agents raised the rentals by $10 per week, getting in before the official announcement. But of cause just a coincidence.
    Cowboy Jim
    9th Mar 2019
    10:23am
    Who wants to be an owner of a rental property these days? Was one in the 70s and early 80s - today it's not worth the hassle. CGT on top when finally selling makes it a stupid investment. Years gone by renters had more respect for others' property and treated it appropriately.
    LJ
    11th Mar 2019
    2:56pm
    Labor's 'Progressive' (read as Marxist) left irrationally hate small mums and dads investors putting their hard-earned in rental property anyway.

    Instead, Labor wants large institutional investors, for example, global insurance companies and superannuation funds to own and manage rental property. Doubtless, Labor is hoping to lean on the superannuation funds, in effect raiding people's super, to provide for the welfare and low-income housing.

    The profits would go overseas and the rental increases would be ramped up to provide profitable returns to better match the high risks and management which rentals do not do now. Mums and dads investors are easily bluffed into hoping for an increase of value someday decades away (and then they are being taxed for inflation!).
    Chuck
    9th Mar 2019
    5:12pm
    I agree with those who say we should have a universal pension scheme fo
    r all. The only conditions being must be of pension age and must have paid tax for 15 years. If newcomers can get the OAP then its unfair that australians who have paid they way don't qualify because of unfair tests originated by fat bureaucrats.


    Join YOURLifeChoices, it’s free

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