# My current super balance is?



## BIG BWACULL (30 August 2007)

I thought i'd start a thread for those of you that wish to tell everyone how much super you have, Percentage rates you get, So on and so on, You can even tell everyone what size shoes you have and how they refer to the size of your penis, The cars you drive that Pull tha chicks (Tha LADIES) In essence Yes this is a bragging thread, So Fire a away

I'll Start
My Current Super Balance is "Who gives a rats ass as its my super"
Bye Bye


----------



## Judd (30 August 2007)

BIG BWACULL said:


> I thought i'd start a thread for those of you that wish to tell everyone how much super you have, Percentage rates you get, So on and so on, You can even tell everyone what size shoes you have and how they refer to the size of your penis, The cars you drive that Pull tha chicks (Tha LADIES) In essence Yes this is a bragging thread, So Fire a away
> 
> I'll Start
> My Current Super Balance is "Who gives a rats ass as its my super"
> Bye Bye




Well, if you don't give a rats why should I?  There is a lesson there for you kris - should you wish to learn.


----------



## nizar (30 August 2007)

Well my current super balance is probably much less than $1000.


----------



## krisbarry (30 August 2007)

BIG BWACULL said:


> I thought i'd start a thread for those of you that wish to tell everyone how much super you have, Percentage rates you get, So on and so on, You can even tell everyone what size shoes you have and how they refer to the size of your penis, The cars you drive that Pull tha chicks (Tha LADIES) In essence Yes this is a bragging thread, So Fire a away
> 
> I'll Start
> My Current Super Balance is "Who gives a rats ass as its my super"
> Bye Bye




What a stupid thread, try being a little more constructive!

I am doing what I am doing, to solve the housing crisis problem for myself.  What are you doing to solve the problem, nothing I suspect, but adding to the problem.

I have no time for this silly thread!


----------



## Judd (30 August 2007)

Stop_the_clock said:


> What a stupid thread, try being a little more constructive!
> 
> I am doing what I am doing, to solve the housing crisis problem for myself.  What are you doing to solve the problem, nothing I suspect, but adding to the problem.
> 
> I have no time for this silly thread!




Then why did you bother to respond?

Is there an emotive for Hook, Line and Sinker?


----------



## krisbarry (30 August 2007)

Judd said:


> Then why did you bother to respond?
> 
> Is there an emotive for Hook, Line and Sinker?





Just doing my bit to make my life better and parading it to the world at the same time as to not give a stuff about anyone elses welfare.

Home owners/investors taught me this golden rule, last year!

They told me to stop bitching and do something about it, and I have and I am damn proud of it, I and I will keep on flaunting it to the world.

*As long as my Mcmansion is better than your Mcmansion then I am alright thanks jack!*


----------



## Judd (30 August 2007)

Stop_the_clock said:


> Just doing my bit to make my life better and parading it to the world at the same time as to not give a stuff about anyone elses welfare.
> 
> Home owners/investors taught me this golden rule, last year!
> 
> ...




What a poor little nothing you are and will be.  It is sad that you do not have enough insight to understand.


----------



## krisbarry (30 August 2007)

Judd said:


> What a poor little nothing you are and will be.  It is sad that you do not have enough insight to understand.




lol, we can be poor togther


----------



## Judd (30 August 2007)

Stop_the_clock said:


> lol, we can be poor togther



Oh my dear boy, you do misunderstand.  I am not poor.  Far from it in fact.  Whereas you are.


----------



## krisbarry (30 August 2007)

Judd said:


> Oh my dear boy, you do misunderstand.  I am not poor.  Far from it in fact.  Whereas you are.




LOL, no I am not atually poor either, 5 billion other people are below me.  Think globally me dear friend, not in your Mcmansion, but the globe that we live on!

Its the way you think about wealth!


----------



## Kimosabi (30 August 2007)

not going backwards because it's all CASH!!!


----------



## Kathmandu (3 September 2007)

Super, who care's, You can't access or use it for anything constructive untill your retired.

I know STC thinks he can, but I would still like to see him produce evidence that show's he can access fund's to purchase a house that will be able to be used for anything in the future.

I'd much rather have access to the dollars NOW, and invest it how and where I like, and actually have control.

Of course if I was about to retire, I may well sell up and tip the bucks into Super, but I dare say in 20 years time the rules will have changed again.

Dave


----------



## wayneL (3 September 2007)

Kathmandu said:


> Super, who care's, You can't access or use it for anything constructive untill your retired.
> 
> I know STC thinks he can, but I would still like to see him produce evidence that show's he can access fund's to purchase a house that will be able to be used for anything in the future.
> 
> ...



Agree,

It's too big and tempting a pot for the gummint to dip its grubby larcenous paws into at some point. I'm punting that if they do get into trouble that will be the first thing they go for.


----------



## BIG BWACULL (3 September 2007)

Stop_the_clock said:


> Just doing my bit to make my life better and parading it to the world at the same time as to not give a stuff about anyone elses welfare.
> 
> Home owners/investors taught me this golden rule, last year!
> 
> ...



The battle to be better than the jones's GOODLUCK



Stop_the_clock said:


> LOL, no I am not atually poor either, 5 billion other people are below me.  Think globally me dear friend, not in your Mcmansion, but the globe that we live on!
> 
> Its the way you think about wealth!




If wealth is measured by how much money you have in your bank account GOOD LUCK

Your Super Account balance is 53'000 dollars GOODLUCK


----------



## 2020hindsight (3 September 2007)

Stop_the_clock said:


> Just doing my bit to make my life better and parading it to the world at the same time as to not give a stuff about anyone elses welfare.
> 
> .... and I have and I am damn proud of it, I and I will keep on flaunting it to the world.
> 
> *As long as my Mcmansion is better than your Mcmansion then I am alright thanks jack!*



STC, 
On the scale of 1 to 10 - that philosophy ranks  mmmmm , about minus 8 in my books. 

Are you aware that Jackmanism is not considered one of the highest ideals in Australia?  Go down to the war memorial, meditate - see if you can't see a flaw in your argument.

As for taking it to the next step "Think globally me dear friend", - so your pride grows the more distance there is between you and the underprivileged third world. ?? -  words fail me.


----------



## rub92me (3 September 2007)

The size of my super is super-sized.


----------



## mrWoodo (3 September 2007)

Heheh, good thread 

Hell, I don't even plan for my super to be anything more than additional resources when I retire in say 30 yrs time. ie, I expect (hope!) my main income at that point will be from other more proactive investments, such as the markets, property, etc. 

I remember my first real job after uni, the accountant there was saying to me 'you'll have over 1 MILLION DOLLARS upon retirement' (I was 21 at the time). Great, a loaf of bread would probably cost $500 at that point, so it's pointless people in my age group getting too carried away with the weekly fluctuations of something we can't touch for 3 decades more.


----------



## numbercruncher (3 September 2007)

I think that super is a great tool for wealth creation, good insurance policy to, if you fall on real hard times you can generally get access to it for things like emergency medical, about to lose home due to loss of job etc. Also good Death insurance policy if you have dependants!


----------



## Kathmandu (3 September 2007)

numbercruncher said:


> I think that super is a great tool for wealth creation, good insurance policy to, if you fall on real hard times you can generally get access to it for things like emergency medical, about to lose home due to loss of job etc. Also good Death insurance policy if you have dependants!




Your kidding are'nt you.

Can you find any evidence that they will give money from super for medical, or loss of job etc.

Not a "We may" give some back, but actual examples please.

Dave


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (3 September 2007)

nizar said:


> Well my current super balance is probably much less than $1000.




I'd say that my super is probably much less than $1000 too,

Should we be concerned Niz? :


----------



## numbercruncher (3 September 2007)

Kathmandu said:


> Your kidding are'nt you.
> 
> Can you find any evidence that they will give money from super for medical, or loss of job etc.
> 
> ...




Have a crack at google its a wonderful service.



> Superannuation fund trustees and RSA providers administer the release of benefits on the ground of severe financial hardship according to a simple objective test as well as a subjective test. That is, to be granted an early release you must:
> 
> There are only very limited circumstances where benefits may be released on specified grounds. These are defined in Regulations cover expenses in respect of:
> 
> ...





http://www.apra.gov.au/Superannuation/Early-Release-of-Superannuation-Benefits.cfm

I cant be bothered finding specific examples of joe blows who have used these rulings to access there super, im sure you can if your interested.


----------



## Kathmandu (4 September 2007)

From the same site,  http://www.apra.gov.au/Superannuation/Early-Release-of-Superannuation-Benefits.cfm

"Superannuation fund trustees and RSA providers administer the release of benefits on the *ground of severe financial hardship *according to a simple objective test as well as a subjective test. That is, to be granted an early release you must:

*be in receipt of a Commonwealth income support payment, and have been so, continuously, for the last 26 weeks*; and
satisfy the trustee/RSA provider that you are unable to meet reasonable and immediate family living expenses."

*And add in the delay of getting on the benifits in the first place and it's more like 30 weeks before applying, and then how long till payment.*


"If you satisfy both of the above tests, the trustee/RSA provider may, in any twelve month period, release to you one lump sum payment. The lump sum payment is to be no more than a gross amount of $10,000 and no less than $1,000 (or the balance of your benefit if it is less than $1,000)."

*I take it that you will be taxed on the amount they release, so could be as little as a maximum of $5800, hope that'll keep the wolves at bay and pay those medical expenses.*

Dave


----------



## numbercruncher (4 September 2007)

Davo,

Im not implying that super is a substitution for medical or employment insurance, just merely pointing out one of the benefits of super.

Im assuming your anti super ?


----------



## adobee (4 September 2007)

Kathmandu said:


> Your kidding are'nt you.
> 
> Can you find any evidence that they will give money from super for medical, or loss of job etc.
> 
> ...





I would consider super my best investment I make about 32% immediately on anything I put in it and it cant be touched should something happen in my business life.. Plus the government gives me an extra $1500 for $1500 I put in thats 100% return..


----------



## Kathmandu (4 September 2007)

I am not Anti -Super as such, it's just that when I invest in something I want to have control of how it is invested.

I also want to be able to use those investment's to borrow against  for more investment's, and to be able to use money's from my investments to spend on things for my enjoyment now, not when I retire.

I plan on retireing in a couple of years in my early 40's, due to my investments so far, whereas if I tipped all my spare money into super, I would have to work until I  retired at 65

It's all very nice getting 32% and a goverment contribution this week, but if you can't use it or access it, it's neither here nore there until you retire.

If I was closer to retirement age, my thought's would be different, but at a young age, it does nothing for me.

Dave


----------



## theasxgorilla (4 September 2007)

Isn't the highest preservation age 60?  If we consider that the government is trying to get us all to work at least until 65, or even longer if possible, 60 is a form of early retirement, relatively speaking.


----------



## Flying Fish (4 September 2007)

Basicially if you lose an arm or leg you can access, but i believe there  are still hidden fees. Anyone of young age should forget about it, because, you would waste your youth putting money in the hands of a government that may, and already has, done, a back flip.

Forget, only contribute if on the rock and roll.


----------



## hilly1981 (6 September 2007)

There are people that are saying that they dont wish to inject additional funds into their super cause the rules will change again in another 10-20 years time.

Why does it appear that people with that argument assume it will be for the worse? The changes to the super laws in the past 10 to 15 years have become better and better. Who knows they may be fantastic in 20 years time. That is just a risk you take.

Also with those who argue that you should really utilise your money now and invest and therefore set yourself up to retire in your 40's, that is up to the individual. 

You will have those who would get bored and want to go back to work to challenge themselves, and others that are happy to sit around or travel. I know personally I would go nuts not working even if I had plenty of money in the bank. 

There is no right or wrong way about this. Your money, your decision.


----------



## YELNATS (6 September 2007)

hilly1981 said:


> Also with those who argue that you should really utilise your money now and invest and therefore set yourself up to retire in your 40's, that is up to the individual.
> 
> You will have those who would get bored and want to go back to work to challenge themselves, and others that are happy to sit around or travel. I know personally I would go nuts not working even if I had plenty of money in the bank.
> 
> There is no right or wrong way about this. Your money, your decision.




Many of those who say they wish to retire in their 40's haven't thought about it much at all. They would still have on average 40 years to live on the limited funds they have accumulated only over 20 years or so. As such they would probably be forced back into the work force at some point. And they would have paid high taxes accumulating these funds outside superannuation.


----------



## krisbarry (6 September 2007)

adobee said:


> I would consider super my best investment ..




Couldn't agree more...my super is also the best investment...and I am happy to continue dumping spare cash into this baby.

The rules state money can be taken out of super at 55 years of age and above.

So my plan is to retire at 55 ish!


----------



## insider (7 September 2007)

$0.00 for me


----------



## Barrw (7 September 2007)

not a cent more than i have to,
prefer to have hands on my $ to do as i please


----------



## Kathmandu (7 September 2007)

YELNATS said:


> Many of those who say they wish to retire in their 40's haven't thought about it much at all. They would still have on average 40 years to live on the limited funds they have accumulated only over 20 years or so. As such they would probably be forced back into the work force at some point. And they would have paid high taxes accumulating these funds outside superannuation.




But some of us have


----------



## krisbarry (7 September 2007)

Barrw said:


> not a cent more than i have to,
> prefer to have hands on my $ to do as i please




That is the danger and that is why Australians are useless at saving.

We spend all our dosh and more (credit)

Australians (well almost all of us) are piss poor at saving, hence super is a brilliant protection against continual errosions of savings.

Because I cannot touch it, it simply doesn't exsists.

I am like 99.9% of Australian's who have a savings account...there is always an excuse to dip into it for that CD/DVD, car, night out on the town, clothing, furniture etc etc.

I know that when I Bpay money across to my super it goes towards my future wealth and doesn't get touched along the way, and therefore there is also no tempation to spend it.


----------



## TheRage (7 September 2007)

Stop_the_clock said:


> Couldn't agree more...my super is also the best investment...and I am happy to continue dumping spare cash into this baby.
> 
> The rules state money can be taken out of super at 55 years of age and above.
> 
> So my plan is to retire at 55 ish!




Only if you meet a condition of release or you might have to wait until you turn 60.

Conditions of release include:
1) Retirement after preservation age where there is termination of employment and no intention to return to full time employment or part time employment.
2) Retirement after age 60.
3) Reaching preservation age but not retired- can access funds via non- commutable income stream (Transition to Retirement)
4) Permanent Incapacity 
5) Financial HArdship or compassionate grounds
6) Permanent Departure from Australia- temporary visa holders only
7) Termination of emploment only any age but can only access restricted non-preserved benefits.

Preservation age for anyone born later than 1 july 1969 is 60. Therefore to access funds before 60 one of the conditions above must be met.

For what it is worth I do beleive that Superannuation represents a superior tax structure for investing. However I also feel that when the government can no longer pay age pension because 1/4 of the population are supporting the remainder, then Super will be an easy target for all sorts of tax. My view is to build up both Super and non super investments.

This is not financial advice.


----------



## hilly1981 (7 September 2007)

TheRage said:


> For what it is worth I do beleive that Superannuation represents a superior tax structure for investing. However I also feel that when the government can no longer pay age pension because 1/4 of the population are supporting the remainder, then Super will be an easy target for all sorts of tax. My view is to build up both Super and non super investments.
> 
> This is not financial advice.




This is true but the government will also still want to keep super as an attractive option to put away savings for retirement. Increasing the taxes on these funds will start turning people away again.

If only we all had a crystal ball and could see what is going to happen.


----------



## Barrw (7 September 2007)

Stop_the_clock said:


> That is the danger and that is why Australians are useless at saving.
> 
> We spend all our dosh and more (credit)
> 
> ...




yes plnning for your future is necessary 
once your money is in super its locked in circumstances change
and life needs to be enjoyed on the way


----------



## professor_frink (7 September 2007)

Barrw said:


> not a cent more than i have to,
> prefer to have hands on my $ to do as i please




same here. Last thing I want is to be in a situation where I have enough to retire, and not be able to access it because the govt of the day decides to change the rules. Personally, I'd be very surprised if the govt in 30 years time allow people to access their super at 55 when they still want us as taxpayers to fund the ongoing cost of keeping the baby boomers alive.


----------



## insider (7 September 2007)

What happens to your super if you die young?


----------



## Barrw (7 September 2007)

insider said:


> What happens to your super if you die young?




you can nominate who it goes to


----------



## TheRage (7 September 2007)

insider said:


> What happens to your super if you die young?





On Death Superannuation is paid out according to the Trustees wishes of the Superfund unless you have a binding nomination which means that the beneficiary will be paid automatically. If you have a non-binding nomination or no nomination at all, the trustees will use their descretion as to who should be paid. There are cases where people have died without nomination and children from past relationships have laid claim to insurance and benefit. There are also cases where people have had binding nominations with divorced spouses and forgotten to take them off effectively leaving their superannuation to their divorced spouse. Binding nominations usually need to be made every two years to avoid this problem.

This is not financial advice


----------



## dalek (7 September 2007)

insider said:


> What happens to your super if you die young?




same thing that happens to all your stuff......someone else gets it.
but...I am (fairly)reliably informed if you have accumulated the most cash & toys by the time you die, you win !!


----------



## bvbfan (8 September 2007)

Check what type of fund you have because if you are a public servant most likely you are legislated to who your beneficaries are so nominating a beneficiary is not available.


----------



## Flying Fish (8 September 2007)

So at what age must i be now, to recieve the pension in the future. or will it be abolished?


----------



## insider (8 September 2007)

Barrw said:


> you can nominate who it goes to




How do you nominate someone when you're dead?


----------



## Wysiwyg (8 September 2007)

insider said:


> How do you nominate someone when you're dead?




Easy....you hide the will in your house somewhere and in your last breath tell someone that you hid the will in the house.

After you have died , the hopefuls turn the house upside down to find the will.This could take several weeks and once found the beneficiaries will be known after you`re dead.


p.s.the real kicker in that scenario is that you don`t  hide the will in your house.That would be the epitome of frustration for the would be beneficiaries.


----------



## Julia (8 September 2007)

insider said:


> How do you nominate someone when you're dead?




You make a Will now, of course.  Everyone should have a Will.
If you die without a Will (intestate) it is possible that any assets you have may end up with the State.
It's also a good idea to have a document called - depending on which State you live in - a Living Will, or an Advance Health Directive.  This gives you the option of stating what treatment you do or do not want, whether or not to resuscitate you if you've had a life threatening event, etc etc.  The form can be obtained at any newsagent for a few dollars and can prevent you being maintained on life support indefinitely if that's something you would not want.


----------



## Gundini (8 September 2007)

BIG BWACULL said:


> I'll Start
> My Current Super Balance is "Who gives a rats ass as its my super"
> Bye Bye




Think it funny that nobody has answered the question in 3 pages!

Super and finances are a personal issue with most people, but I don't give a rats, so I'll start....

My current Super balance is around $150K... I don't work for an employer anymore, so I don't contribute anymore. 

It was about $100K more when I left my 20 year job, but I took my unpresserved amount to clear my debts.

The super fund is better than average, acheiving around 21% in the good times, with the worst year being around 6%. 

Definately not enough to retire on, but I'm 45, and spend alot of time doing what I like. For me, there is a balance between wealth and happiness. 

To be honest, when I started contributing ito Super in 1985, I never thought I would ever see it. I still may not!

Leaving your money in the hands of others is not always a comforting thought. But leaving it in my pocket is not always the smartest move either!

Life is a balance.....


----------



## Julia (8 September 2007)

Gundini said:


> Definately not enough to retire on, but I'm 45, and spend alot of time doing what I like. For me, there is a balance between wealth and happiness.
> 
> 
> Life is a balance.....




I completely agree.  Everyone will have a different idea about how much is enough, but after that point continuing to want more and more money seems like some sort of game.

I'd be interested in others' views about this.  i.e. do you have a 'target' amount after which you will be happy to contribute to others or just simply enjoy spending as you wish.  Or does the desire to make money become ingrained?


----------



## disarray (11 September 2007)

i'm 33 and have about $30,000 in a well performing industry fund. i don't particularly trust super and think it is entirely likely the government will pillage it further down the track. i also have no expectation for any kind of pension at all and so am trying to build an asset base to carry me to the grave in reasonable comfort.

30 years is a long time and so much can happen globally in that period. in times of crisis or national emergency (as has happened during wars) it is all too easy to grab these funds because it is an "emergency" and thats that. inflation, financial meltdown, mass migration of people and the sheer pace of change in the world makes we want to keep my wealth close at hand and quite liquid.


----------



## krisbarry (11 September 2007)

disarray said:


> i'm 33 and have about $30,000 in a well performing industry fund. i don't particularly trust super and think it is entirely likely the government will pillage it further down the track. i also have no expectation for any kind of pension at all and so am trying to build an asset base to carry me to the grave in reasonable comfort.
> 
> 30 years is a long time and so much can happen globally in that period. in times of crisis or national emergency (as has happened during wars) it is all too easy to grab these funds because it is an "emergency" and thats that. inflation, financial meltdown, mass migration of people and the sheer pace of change in the world makes we want to keep my wealth close at hand and quite liquid.




Same age as me, well done.

I would still consider you do some research and switch funds into a a geared share fund.  You pay a little more in fees per year, but they tend to return much higher rates, almost double what you get now


----------



## theasxgorilla (11 September 2007)

disarray said:


> 30 years is a long time and so much can happen globally in that period. in times of crisis or national emergency (as has happened during wars) it is all too easy to grab these funds because it is an "emergency" and thats that. inflation, financial meltdown, mass migration of people and the sheer pace of change in the world makes we want to keep my wealth close at hand and quite liquid.




Sounds like a wise outlook to me.  If you're a way off actually getting access to the funds (as I am too) it seems a bit risky to drive much more than you have to into super.  I understand your reasoning for doing it STC, so please don't take this as a personal dig, as I think your idea still has merit.  The risks I see going forward in Aust for the next 30 years is that we took a time of greatest properity due to our natural resource endowments and p1ssed it up against the wall without making any long-sighted infrastructure investments to solve big problems like water and transport and to hedge against times when global resource demand subsides.


----------



## bean (11 September 2007)

Being a public servant,  I have a reasonable super.
However when I look at it point to pick.
Buying my first house wife young children and 5% of my salary taken away.
It made it a struggle.
Super is good but I believed when I first started paying I was getting ripped of as most of population did not have super and they had that money in there pockets to buy a dearer house or afford house they were buying easier.

My estimates of what my super was worth a few years ago has evaporated with inflation which is (rising house prices, rising everthiing).
They are changing it so I can work longer have more money, whoppie doo.

Your health and well being is greater than your super.
I am going to retire soon not much money but enough to live on but I will enjoy life (which is more than money can buy).


----------



## Judd (13 September 2007)

bean said:


> Being a public servant,  I have a reasonable super.
> However when I look at it point to pick.
> Buying my first house wife young children and 5% of my salary taken away.
> It made it a struggle.
> ...




Goodness, get a grip.  Lifetime indexed pension.  A gift from the Gods (and the taxpayer.)

I'm an ex-public servant with 30 years service.  In the latter stages I was paying $4000 pa (5% of salary) in after tax money to the CSS.  When I took a redundancy (both my employer and I agreed that a "career change" would be to everyone's advantage), I preserved the funds in the CSS (sorry fellow taxpayers but I was not prepared to willingly give up an indexed pension.)

When I take that pension in 6 or so years time, all things being equal, it will provide about $55k pa.  It means I will reap $4k * 30 ($120k) in less than 3 years.

How on earth can you complain about that return but instead whine, "Gee, I wish I had a bigger house?"

Missus and I are still in the same 3 bedroom house we bought 20 years ago (78k purchase, 36k down and 42K borrowed, paid off as if we borrowed the entire 78k.)  It does what it is designed to do, put a roof over our head and does it well.  What else does one need for heavens sake?


----------



## bvbfan (3 October 2007)

The CSS was a great scheme and for those unfortunate enough to be fooled into moving into the PSS what a shame.

It concerns my that in the PSS the scheme is set up so that it's still in the governments favour to screw the members out of what they should be entitled to.

For most people the biggest component will come from a CPI indexed employer component. 
Now tell me the government wants to report the true inflation figures here. 
I don't have the amounts paid in aged pensions but I suspect that any changes to the CPI will incur far greater liabilities for the government over the longer term when calculating the superannuation liabilities for those in the PSS and (possibly CSS too)


----------

