Noel Whittaker on all matters retirement

Your queries answered: investment, super, the lot.

Noel on all matters retirement

Noel Whittaker is YourLifeChoices’ personal finance guru and assists hundreds of members with their queries. While he is taking a well-earned break, we present a selection of his responses to your queries and which may help others in similar situations.

•••

Q. Ron
I turned 76 in July and I’m thinking about retiring. However, it seems that because of my age, I am not allowed to put money into super, so I have to find some other way of getting a regular income to see out whatever life I may have left.

My wife died five years ago and some investments since then – including in a taxi before Uber – have cost me dearly. Currently, I have a small management rights business, but feel it's time to relax a bit and do some more travelling.

I will probably have only about $550,000 to invest, and naturally want to find a way to safely maximise my income, including whatever Age Pension is available. I don't care if I buy a cheap house, unit or a caravan, or maybe rent somewhere. I’m just hoping to have enough coming in to see me out.

A. As you are now single, you are getting close to the cut-off point for the Age Pension. Certainly, if you buy a cheap unit you will be turning an assessable asset into a non-assessable asset and this should increase your pension enormously. To do the calculations, just go to my website and play with the Age Pension calculators. You will need to use the deeming calculator first to work out what notional income will be applied to your remaining financial assets. Don’t worry about superannuation – it’s mainly about saving tax, and in your situation, tax should not be an issue for you.

•••

Q. Shannon
We are 60 and 54 years old, and own two houses. We live in one and it is twice the value of our second home, which we rent to our daughter. My wife works but I have been unemployed for two years, we are living off our savings and they are being drained at a rapid rate. What is the best way to prepare for retirement? I have in mind selling the larger home and moving into the smaller one and placing the proceeds of the home sale into our self-managed super fund. What are the ramifications of doing this? We have lived in both houses, the current for 14 years, and the second for nine years. What is your advice?

A. You will need to have face-to-face advice with an expert who has looked into your financial and personal situation. But generally, the first home should be free of capital gains tax as it appears to be your residence, but there could be long-term implications regarding capital gains tax on the second property once you live in it. However, the good news is if you live in it for a long time, any capital gains tax on that property may be quite small. Placing the excess proceeds to superannuation could be useful for tax minimisation, but you would need to make a long-term decision as to whether you may be eligible for an Age Pension. An adviser can guide you through all these issues.

•••

Q. Deirdre
I have spent a heap of money over the past 16 years. I have no education but heaps of grit. I immigrated with a young daughter, worked hard and put any money I had into my daughter’s education. I’m now 61, so it’s very important that I plan correctly for my retirement.

I will be receiving $100,000 from family in the UK and wish to either invest it in super and build on that, or in shares. I have a stable job three days a week and receive $600 per week from a family commercial property my brother controls.

Could you please offer some advice? My thinking is to probably shore up my super and sacrifice $200 per week into it, then set and forget until I’m 67 and eligible for an Age Pension. I’m renting at the moment and will be for some time – until I perhaps receive an inheritance to buy a home. I just wonder what is the best option. I’d really appreciate some trustworthy options.

A. Certainly maximise your contributions to super. You are allowed a total of $25,000 a year in concessional contributions but these include the 9.5 per cent compulsory superannuation contribution from your employer if you have one. For example, if your employer was contributing $5000 a year, you could contribute an extra $20,000 a year as a tax deduction. Just bear in mind concessional contributions incur a 15 per cent entry tax. I note your comments about buying a house in the future.

If you buy a unit or house, you will be turning an assessable asset in terms of Age Pension eligibility, that is, savings, into a non-assessable asset and this could increase your pension enormously. To do the calculations, go to my website and play with the age pension calculators.

•••

Q. Andrea
My husband and I are heading into retirement and have finally paid off the house. Apart from a few thousand dollars on our credit cards, we owe nothing. Should we continue to pay for life insurance? We are both insured for $300,000 each, and it costs us thousands to maintain this. Should we continue to pay through the nose when we are on a limited retirement income, just to ensure our adult children get a big payout when we pass away?

A. As you have pointed out, life insurance has a cost and, traditionally, the main purpose is to ensure that your partner can carry on if you die. It is really up to you to decide the best course of action here, but keep in mind it will get more expensive every year and you may well decide that it is now costing more than it’s worth.

I think at this stage in your life, your own personal cash position should be more important than leaving a large sum to your children.

•••

Q. Dragrush
I would like to know the various ways I can get access to a lump sum, say $75,000, from a fully owned investment property worth around $500,000. I am on a part Age Pension.

A. You sound like the perfect candidate for the government-administered Pension Loans Scheme, which offers reverse mortgage loans to seniors at 5.25 per cent. The scheme is scheduled to start next year.

Do you have a question you’d like Noel to tackle? Email us at newsletters@yourlifechoices.com.au

Noel Whittaker is the author of Making Money Made Simple and numerous other books on personal finance. His answers are general in nature, and readers should seek their own professional advice before making any financial decisions.

Are you eligible for an Age Pension? Do you know your rights? The RetirePlanner™ tool has all the information you need.

RELATED ARTICLES

    Disclaimer: All content on YourLifeChoices website is of a general nature and has been prepared without taking into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. It has been prepared with due care but no guarantees are provided for the ongoing accuracy or relevance. Before making a decision based on this information, you should consider its appropriateness in regard to your own circumstances. You should seek professional advice from a financial planner, lawyer or tax agent in relation to any aspects that affect your financial and legal circumstances.





    COMMENTS

    To make a comment, please register or login
    GrayComputing
    27th Dec 2018
    2:02pm
    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?
    Mad as Hell
    28th Dec 2018
    8:22am
    The 2017 changes to the Pensioner Assets Test was stolen assets from 330,000 pensioners by the LNP under a lie of a budget emergency.
    Anonymous
    29th Dec 2018
    7:44am
    The assets test is a fake test of ''wealth'' that invites and rewards gross manipulation and dishonesty and punishes the behaviour that is good for the nation - work, saving, responsible living, honesty and integrity. It takes more from many than they are able to earn, thus representing a more than 100% tax on savings and denying savers even a single cent of benefit for their endeavours. It encourages greater reliance on the pension and reduced efforts to cater for one's own retirement - unless one happens to be an investment guru or have accrued mega millions. It is illogical, unfair in the extreme, economically unsustainable and patently STUPID - the work of inept politicians who have neither imagination nor common sense. It MUST be abandoned.

    Unfortunately the LNP won't acknowledge their treacherous error and Labor now supports the cruel change the LNP made. But worse, Labor now plans to totally demolish the lifestyle of those the LNP targeted. Having lost up to $12000 in the 2017 attack on retired savers, the same folk now stand to lose countless thousands - potentially much more than their previous loss - by a vicious and unfair attack by Labor forcing the less well off to pay unfair tax on dividend income while the wealthy continue to receive their full tax benefit. And tragically, many here are so green-eyed and selfish - or so blind and ignorant - that they support this hideous theft and demolition of everything responsible people worked for over 4-5 decades.

    Worst of all, Labor is selling its vile policy with blatant lies. It claims concern that 53% of FC refunds go to people with ore than $2.4 million in super, yet it is taking NOTHING from anyone with millions. Only those with LESS than $1.6 million will lose. Those with barely over the asset limit (around $840,000 for a couple) may be struggling to achieve an income anywhere even close to that pensioners enjoy, but will lose up to 30% of their income until they effectively donate their savings to the taxpayer so that they qualify for pension benefits and cost the nation far more than Shorten's greedy grab saved. And for daring to try to save the nation around $50,000 a year, they will be punished FOR LIFE - never able to profit from investment in franked shares again. Meanwhile the millionaires and the high income earners will continue to party with their FC tax credits! And this from the party that CLAIMS to support battlers. What a disgrace!
    floss
    27th Dec 2018
    2:31pm
    GC. The only way to go makes a lot of sense really.
    Anonymous
    29th Dec 2018
    7:54am
    'Sense' is something that is totally absent in Canberra, unfortunately.
    Old Geezer
    27th Dec 2018
    3:07pm
    If my partner and I buy a house worth say $5 million and only have $400,000 in assets left can we get the full old age pension?
    Cowboy Jim
    27th Dec 2018
    3:36pm
    Under current rules - YES, OG. Looks stupid; but that is the rule. The outgoings for a property like that might take quite a bit out of your pension but you can hand the place over to the next generation without any duties, Death ones or Inheritance ones. Most countries have universal pensions but they also do have exit taxes before the offspring gets their hands on the goodies.
    Should I win the lottery I would upgrade my humble dwelling before losing the pension, just common sense. Why do you think property prices are so high in this country??
    Ardnaher
    31st Dec 2018
    11:44am
    And that is where it is all wrong. Someone can have all that money tied up in a home and get the aged pension yet if someone had that amount in cash in the bank...no pension.

    Of course the childen of the home owner help out or pay all the outgoings because they know at the end of the day they will be inheriting a $5 million plus home courtesty of the taxpayer.

    It is time this was fixed.
    Cowboy Jim
    31st Dec 2018
    1:10pm
    Agree Noodles! But how are we going to fix that? What about an inheritance tax for larger estates like in other countries and then we can bring in the universal pension GrayComputing above wants us to have? I do feel for people who bought their place in the right area 50 years ago and now live in a place that is worth $2 million. I want them to be able to live where they always have been but maybe at the end of the day, the heirs might be asked to pay a 10% or so windfall tax to get some pension money back.
    And yes, I value my concession card. Prefer that to an independent income of equal value without the card as so many SFRs are doing. I do not mind telling C/Link when I leave the country on holidays either - I have done my time in the workforce and now I am getting something back. Never even got a first home buyers grant and was never on the dole.
    Anonymous
    1st Jan 2019
    8:49am
    I think the OAP should be universal and retirement income taxed. but here's another idea I think could work. Remove the assets test (which is a fake and cruel test that encourages rorting and manipulation) and instead test income, including deemed income at a reasonable rate on ALL assets- including the family home, but allowing a generous threshold before deeming cuts in. Treat ALL assets the same, except that if they return an income higher than the deeming rate, the income is counted and if they return less than the deeming rate, the deemed income is counted. Allowing a generous threshold effectively exempts the family home, but if the home is of low value other assets - including investment property or shares etc - are exempted, so the unfairness to those with modest homes is removed. For those with high value homes who don't want to downsize, but inadequate income, offer a reverse mortgage scheme at fair interest and guaranteed residency rights for life, but the loan and interest repayable on death.

    Regardless of what we lobby for, I doubt any politician has the brains or guts to do anything constructive, but we should all fight hard against Shorten's treachery, because the people he is punishing are those who accepted modest accommodation and invested to NOT be a burden on the taxpayer, and he's lying about attacking the wealthy. Anyone with over $1.6 million retains at least part of their franking credit benefit and the more they have, they more they retain - along with high income earners. He is beating up on the people the ALP claims to protect: the battlers who are contributing most. His hypocrisy and deception is disgusting, and it beggars belief that he can fool so many people with this disgraceful confidence trick. Heaven help ALL retirees when he stuffs the pension system completely by wiping out the benefit of working and investing and pushes millions more onto pensions. We will all - except the very rich and favoured - end up having to work until we die.
    Misty
    27th Dec 2018
    6:18pm
    OG would that be your home to live in or an investment property?.
    Anonymous
    29th Dec 2018
    7:52am
    It would be his home of course, Misty. Only a blithering idiot would buy a $5 million house as an investment and forfeit the opportunity for a pension.

    And no, Cowboy Jim, the outgoings would quite likely be no more than for a modest home. Council rates go on land value and ignore the value of the build. A $5 million home would be UNLIKELY to need the maintenance and repair a much cheaper home might require. It would have the best of everything to reduce ongoing maintenance costs.

    The government inflicts harsh punishment on folk who accept modest accommodation and try to be self-sufficient in retirement. Labor wants to demolish them completely and ensure only the very rich, the genuinely poor, and the wealthy manipulators who pretend hardship enjoy the benefits the taxpayer funds. Decent, honest, hard working people who live responsibly and contribute tens of thousands to the budget each year by not drawing a pension they don't need are being treated like criminals by Labor and threatened with deprivation of everything they worked for over a lifetime. And dumb Labor supporters endorse this - blinded by envy or hoodwinked by Shorten's outright lies (which anyone with a brain should readily see ARE LIES, because the policy itself proves he lies)
    inextratime
    29th Dec 2018
    5:22pm
    If you had $5million to spend on a house why on earth would you want the OAP ?

    More rubbish from the financial guru.
    Misty
    29th Dec 2018
    6:08pm
    It is not the financial guru who is spending 5 million on a house but, as you say, if you have that sort of money to spend why would you even think of going on the OAP, beggars belief.
    Anonymous
    30th Dec 2018
    7:12am
    And that's the sort of irrelevant thinking that justifies BAD political policy. No wonder this country is in a mess when people focus on stupid assumptions instead of on the flaws in the system and the harm those flaws are causing.

    OG was making a point. The amount is NOT relevant. But the POINT matters - and the POINT is that people ARE exploiting a bad system, and instead of fixing it, Labor wants to make it 10,000 times worse by rewarding the exploiters and demolishing the life savings of honest and ethical folk.
    Anonymous
    30th Dec 2018
    7:29am
    Try reading and thinking about Cowboy Jim's answer. Should he win the lottery, he'd buy a better house rather than lose the pension. He didn't mention how much he might win or how much he'd spend on a house, because the system allows any amount anyone pleases. Someone could spend $50 million on a house if they wanted to, and still get the aged pension. Why would they? I have no idea. All I know is that Labor supporters are quite content for people who do that to get a pension AND franking credits, but see a couple with a modest home and responsible investments under $1 million - giving them less income than the OAP - have their lifestyle totally demolished and be deprived of income for the rest of their lives.

    Instead of asking 'why would they', sensible people ask 'why does the law let them'?' Why does Malcolm Turnbull hoard his money off shore to avoid tax? He inherited $100 million, yet he minimizes tax by keeping his money in the Caymans - and while ranting about the deficit and stealing money from retirees claiming it was 'necessary', he made not even a mention of changing the law that allowed that. Nor has the super rich Shorten ever hinted at taking more from the super rich.

    The super rich are selfish and greedy. They steal from anyone who has worked hard and saved well and achieved modest comfort, but they make sure they get every cent and every benefit available for themselves - no matter that they have absolutely no need of more and couldn't spend more in 50 lifetimes. Exactly what Shorten is doing. Not taking ONE SINGLE CENT from the wealthy or the high income earners. Just attacking battlers whose hard work and responsible living SHOULD entitle them to a comfortable retirement - stealing their earnings and grinding them into hardship. And bribing pensioners to support his evil - whether those pensioners be poor or filthy rich and ripping off the system.
    Anonymous
    30th Dec 2018
    9:30am
    BTW. I don't know who you are calling a ''financial guru'' - OG (who appears to be one) or me? I have NEVER claimed to be a financial guru and I am certainly NOT one. If I were, I might be able to circumvent the harm Bill Shorten threatens. I am simply a person with the common sense to read and understand government policy, pension rules and proposals, and the logic to see what is wrong with the system and the stinking evil policies being proposed by idiots who want to be paid a king's ransom to stuff it up further.
    Old Geezer
    31st Dec 2018
    11:01am
    It actually makes sense for a wealthy family to put the oldies in say a $10 million house and have them collect the pension. Family pays all outgoings of the house simply because it is a tax free store of wealth for the whole family. Under Labor this will become even better with the increase in CGT payable.

    OGR Turnbull didn't inherit $100 million he made most of his money in the takeover of Ozemail. I only had a small holding but did pocket a few bob too.
    Old Geezer
    31st Dec 2018
    11:03am
    Turnbull purchased a stake in the internet service provider Ozemail in 1994 for $500,000. He sold this stake several months before the dot com bubble burst in 1999 for $57 million to then-telecommunications giant MCI WorldCom.
    Old Geezer
    31st Dec 2018
    11:05am
    What went on here disturbs me though.

    In May 2002, Turnbull appeared before the HIH Insurance royal commission to be questioned on Goldman Sachs's involvement in the possible privatisation of one of the acquisitions of the collapsed insurance company. The Royal Commissioner's report made no adverse findings against him or Goldman Sachs,[38] however, Turnbull was one of nine defendants who settled later litigation over the collapse in undisclosed payments, thought to be worth as much as $500m
    Ardnaher
    31st Dec 2018
    11:49am
    The reason someone with a $5M home would want the aged pension is because they see that around 80% of retirees get it plus the concession card and that want some of that as well..It is called greed. " If they have it I want it too".

    I can totally understand the thought process but until such time as there are changes this will always be the way. Many who can self fund do so quite happily as they are making more money off their investments than they would on the pension and even allowing for the concession card.

    There would be more money for those who really need the pension if those who manipulate the system were taken out of the equation.
    Anonymous
    1st Jan 2019
    9:12am
    Noodles, the manipulation of the system will increase dramatically because both government and opposition insist on beating up on those who don't manipulate. Labor is going to demolish the lifestyle of 660,000 honest, ethical retirees for no better reason than that are doing what's good for the economy - battling to avoid being a burden on taxpayers for as much of their retirement as possible. For doing that, Labor is going to deny them needed franking credit income FOR LIFE - while handing out happily to anyone with sufficient wealth or income to pay income tax - including anyone with super above $1.6 million (and the more they have above that magic figure, the more franking credits they enjoy!). Shorten is also happy to hand out to ANYONE on a pension, regardless of their actual wealth and the extent of their manipulation. Only the honest and ethical with limited means will suffer persecution.

    The LNP declared if you earn less than 7.8% on investments, you must suffer an income LESS than you'd get on the pension and ZERO concessions, unless you choose to live in a multi-million dollar house and reduce your investments to below an absurdly low (and NOT age adjusted) threshold.

    They system is so appalling that people are punished for putting dollars aside for future known health or care costs. The couple who put their aged parents into care and spend hundreds of thousands cruising the world are richly rewarded, while the couple who delay their trip of a lifetime to care for their oldies until death are punished harshly.

    The guy who gets a compensation payout after an accident - intended to pay for disability aids and ongoing care and household help - has to spend it compensating for lost pension income and have NOTHING to cover the expenses the compensation was meant to pay for. Why wouldn't he buy a fancy big house and collect a fortnightly pay cheque from the taxpayer, plus free medical and help with energy bills, rates, car registration, transport, chemist bills, etc. etc. etc. ad infinitum?

    Oh, and then there's the nastiness the SFR suffers from pensioners who wrongly assume that SFRs must have been 'lucky', avoided tax, or committed some other awful offence, because NOBODY could have more money than the poor pensioner solely as a result of working harder or managing better.

    The message is clear. MANIPULATE OR BE BRANDED AN IDIOT AND SUFFER UNFAIR HARDSHIP.

    And now there is talk of making the pension a loan against the estate, removing the incentive even to spend 25+ years paying off a mortgage. Watch the rents skyrocket and homeless numbers increase!

    We need to restore incentives and rewards for work and responsible living. Until we stop this absurd notion that the poor (and those who can create the appearance of being poor) are ''entitled'' and the only way to pay their entitlement is to rob honest ethical workers and savers with modest assets (of course leaving the rich and privileged well alone!) the country will continue to go to hell.
    Ardnaher
    1st Jan 2019
    8:24pm
    I am at the stage of life OGR where I cannot be bothered "manipulating" the system. I am happy with the income I have from my investments without doing the wrong thing. I live in a lovely retirement village and happily do so and enjoy my life immensely.

    I have a very good lifestyle and want for nothing and I do not want any stress in my life now.

    Have lived a good and fulfilling life and am now reaping the rewards of my endeavours.

    If other want to spend the rest of their days winging and whining about what they do and dont have that is their choice :).
    Anonymous
    2nd Jan 2019
    9:56am
    I don't see it as a case of being dissatisfied or whinging and whining, Noodles. For me it's about the future of this country and the society our grandchildren will inherit. I care about my children's retirement and my grandchildren's. I care about the genuinely disadvantaged who are struggling on basic pensions after a lifetime of sickness or disability. I care about the people who have been retrenched in the late 50s or early 60s. I care about the fact that the aged pension is under threat, and maintaining a situation where manipulation and rorting benefits and being honest and ethical disadvantages folk will put so much more pressure on the welfare system that it will likely collapse.

    I believe the aged pension should be universal so that the incentive to manipulate is removed. I object to Shorten's franking credit tax because he is attacking the retirees who are contributing most to the economy - folk whose investments are driving business growth, jobs and more tax revenue; whose spending in retirement (after a lifetime of saving) is generating indirect tax revenue that comes from THEIR pockets, and isn't just recycled tax dollars paid to them in pensions; whose diligence is saving the nation around $1 million over the course of their retirement. Instead of attacking them, Shorten should be applauding them and creating a society in which more people choose that path wherever possible. The LNP should never have created a situation where people battling to get average (5%) returns are worse off for having saved and gain from manipulating to get a pension.

    I'm doing okay in semi-retirement. I hope I never have to quit working, and under current rules I haven't a hope in hell of qualifying for a pension - and that's fine for me, personally. But it's NOT fine for the nation.

    Welfare has had to be tightened so much that today I learned that a man with a pacemaker, kidney failure, and severe depression can't make the required 20 points for a disability pension, and is fighting - after 35 years of paying tax - for the right to some kind of sustenance without having to lie to prospective employers and pretend he could actually work! What sort of society are we living in? And it can only get worse if we continue to feed the greed of manipulators and punish those who do what's good for the economy.

    Misty and Greg can't seem to get past their envy, and they are in good company. But pensioners need to recognize that the middle and upper working class are the backbone of the nation. If we continue to crush them, there will be nothing left for the needy or the manipulators. The manipulators will do okay with hidden savings to fall back on. So, probably, will the victims of Shorten's dishonest treachery. But the needy will go under when there's nothing left to give them.

    For me, a fulfilling life is one spent doing what I can to make society a better place for all. And I'll continue to speak out against the injustices that are destroying it, because our grandchildren deserve better than a bankrupt nation that was plunged into poverty and misery by greedy people rewarding cheats, rorters and manipulators and bashing anyone whose hard work and integrity resulted in a modestly comfortable retirement.

    And BTW. If the universal pension were approved, I'd drop a large sum into a trust for a disabled grandchild and start making generous charity donations. Sadly, the way things are I can't afford to do that, because I'm continually under attack for having worked and saved and I have no way of knowing how long my rapidly eroding savings will last.
    Misty
    2nd Jan 2019
    11:16am
    Once and for all time OGR will you please get over your fixation about me, I AM NOT ENVIOUS OF ANYONE, let alone you, Greg, who ever he is can speak for himself.
    Anonymous
    2nd Jan 2019
    12:54pm
    So you keep saying, Misty, but your comments betray you.
    Misty
    2nd Jan 2019
    1:24pm
    Sorry OGR, I can't help it if that is the way you want to interpret my comments, but your interpretation is not correct.
    Anonymous
    2nd Jan 2019
    4:02pm
    Then maybe you need to review your wording. You CAN help my interpretation, because all I have to interpret is what you write. I know nothing else. And what you write says you are consumed with envy. I will concede, though, that people who are consumed with envy often don't recognize their own feelings. Try avoiding comments 'like nobody I know has that sort of money', remarks in support of unfair demolition of other people's income, and comments that suggest pensioners are in some way superior or have superior entitlements.

    People who work and save are also entitled to respect and courtesy, and to the benefits they EARNED. And saving the nation tens of thousands every year by earning their own living should be recognized as a far greater contribution to Treasury than paying a little bit of income tax. If a small refund of overpaid tax enables them to continue that contribution to the budget, it's far more sensible to continue paying that fair refund than to push them onto a pension that will cost tens of thousands more.

    I keep seeing demands that pensioners be respected, but it's not pensioners being threatened. They ARE being respected, and the respect is evident in fortnightly cheques and twice yearly increases in their income. It's the SFRs who are being abused. And there could be no other motive than envy for wanting to see them hurt.
    Misty
    3rd Jan 2019
    1:44am
    OGR I will have you know I worked until I was 65, sometimes 2 jobs, school assistant until 3 pm and nursing at an aged care facility from 4 until 11 pm so don't talk to me about hard work, I fitted this in as well as bringing up 4 children, sometimes on my own when my husband worked in the mountains and was away. I will say again I don't know any one who has that sort of money, read what you like into that statement, I am only telling the truth and I don't know where you get the idea that I think pensioners are superior or entitled to superior benefits, what rot, it seems to me you are the one who has a complex.
    Anonymous
    3rd Jan 2019
    7:54am
    There you go again, MIsty. Proving my point. What money people you know have is irrelevant. So is what you did for a living and how long you worked and how many children you raised. The point is that OTHER people who worked hard and sacrificed a great deal to be self-supporting in retirement are being abused, and you are supporting and endorsing that abuse.
    Misty
    3rd Jan 2019
    9:12am
    Well OGR why is it ok for you to write reams every time you post, about how hard you had it, how hard you worked, what you went without, but how I lived my life is irrelevant?. I am not even going to respond to your comments they are just bitter and paranoid and same old, same old every post, regardless of what the original topic was, everyone commenting here must know it off word for word by now or maybe they just ignore your comments and don't even bother to read them as they have read them all before.
    Anonymous
    3rd Jan 2019
    12:26pm
    It's fine for you to write whatever you like about how hard you worked and how you lived, Misty. No problem at all. But that's NOT a justification for supporting policies that unfairly demolish the lifestyle of others who also worked hard. THAT'S THE POINT YOU DON'T GET! Your life is no more irrelevant than mine, but YOU are endorsing demolishing my income, implying that it's okay because you don't know anyone with 'that much money' (and I have no idea how much 'that much' is in your mind - because I don't have a great deal at all considering that I have to generate my own income for the rest of my life while helping to fund yours).

    I couldn't care less who reads or doesn't read what. That's their choice - and yours. But I will continue to object strenuously to unfairness, nastiness and disrespect.

    I really think you have a comprehension problem, Misty. You just don't get it at all, do you? You can write as much as you please about your hard work and tough life. It has no meaning - because NOBODY IS THREATENING TO TAKE ALL THE REWARDS AWAY FROM YOU.
    Misty
    3rd Jan 2019
    3:34pm
    As I said , same old, same old reply, can I send you a box of tissues?.
    Anonymous
    3rd Jan 2019
    6:34pm
    More evidence of a nasty attitude with no respect, Misty. Decent people don't want others hurt.
    Misty
    3rd Jan 2019
    10:02pm
    Decent people do not go on and on about what a hard life they had, how badly they have been treated etc etc, they just pull their socks up and get on with life and don't whinge and moan continually about how badly done by they are.
    Anonymous
    4th Jan 2019
    8:25am
    You have weird ideas of decency, as well as zero comprehension Misty. Lots of folk here talk about their past. I have said often that we were very happy. Yes, it was hard, and we suffered a lot of injustice. Those are FACTS. And we made a very happy life for ourselves. Unlike you, we don't bludge on the state in retirement - so I guess we pulled our socks up and got on with far better than you did. And the only gripe I have is that we are now being abused and deprived for having done so while people like you are rewarded for failure. Sorry, I defended pensioners when OG made that statement, but you continue to claim superiority and be nasty and mean. Decent people support calls for justice and fairness, Misty.
    Blinky
    3rd Jan 2019
    12:34pm
    If politicians receive a pension without having to worry about asset and income tests and without living in fear of their home being included in the asset test, why should working Aussies have to worry?
    Politicians do not see their pensions as welfare but as a right, and so should we.
    The easiest solution is to either scrap the damn tests or to increase them twofold. That would be a good reward x people who have saved some of their own money into a super fund!!!
    Wanna save money? Make it harder for assylum seekers, refugees, migrants, and dole-bludgers to receive easy handouts, STOP picking on genuine retirees who worked, paid taxes and saved on super. DO NOT put all pensioners in the same basket!!!
    Anonymous
    3rd Jan 2019
    6:37pm
    Will never happen, Blinky. Too much greed and self-interest. Even pensioners are clapping their hands for joy seeing other retirees treated unfairly. And some among the SFRs are lobbying for pensions to be reduced by including the family home in the assets test, or by making the pension a loan - or for cashless welfare cards to be issued. It's all me me me me and stuff you. If we united, we might make a difference, but I can't see it ever happening.
    sirrom
    2nd May 2019
    11:46am
    A. As you are now single, you are getting close to the cut-off point for the Age Pension.

    This is in reply to question from a 76 yr old who is thinking of retiring.

    I cannot find any reference anywhere -(Aged Pension) that there is a cut off date for applying for an Aged pension


    Join YOURLifeChoices, it’s free

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