Superannuation, the ultimate government cash cow?

[sydboy007]

You seem to be forgetting that is was the Howard govt that created this mess in the first place buying the grey vote with unsustainable election bribes.

Sooner or later whoever is in govt will have to wind back some of these policies.

Too true

Whether it was pensioners and making it easier to get a partial OAP and access to pensioner discounts, boby bonus, child care Howard pretty much said whinge to me and I shall shower you with $$$. I have a once in a century resource boom and I will treat this as a permanent shift in revenue.

The number of people hitting pension ages is going to double over the next 15 or so years. Something needs to be done to share the increased costs of this before the adjustment becomes rather painful for everyone.

We need to get back to seeing welfare as for those at the bottom 25-30% and the rest of us make do with what we have.

Politicians that stop providing simple answers to complex problems would be a great start, but I can't see anything happening till we are in crisis because you will never get bipartisan support. Far easier for an opposition to say no to everything but blame the Govt for not achieving anything. The republicans have done this for years in the USA and look at how paralysed the country is from it.

 

[banco]

You seem to be forgetting that is was the Howard govt that created this mess in the first place buying the grey vote with unsustainable election bribes.

Sooner or later whoever is in govt will have to wind back some of these policies.

Yes but the oldies must have certainty, promises have been made.....

 

[sptrawler]

You seem to be forgetting that is was the Howard govt that created this mess in the first place buying the grey vote with unsustainable election bribes.

Sooner or later whoever is in govt will have to wind back some of these policies.

No not at all, I think Australia needs another two terms of Labor, it will take that amount of time for the results to resonate through to the very young.
As far as I'm concerned, nothing will change much, I've always saved and enjoy tinkering, so my running costs aren't high.
We ride bikes for our everyday running, 2,200k's in the last three months, love it.
So I've finally decided, stop worrying, let you young blokes pick up the slack.
Have fun, vote the goon show in, you will learn a lot.IMO

 

[sptrawler]

Too true

Whether it was pensioners and making it easier to get a partial OAP and access to pensioner discounts, boby bonus, child care Howard pretty much said whinge to me and I shall shower you with $$$. I have a once in a century resource boom and I will treat this as a permanent shift in revenue.

The number of people hitting pension ages is going to double over the next 15 or so years. Something needs to be done to share the increased costs of this before the adjustment becomes rather painful for everyone.

We need to get back to seeing welfare as for those at the bottom 25-30% and the rest of us make do with what we have.

Politicians that stop providing simple answers to complex problems would be a great start, but I can't see anything happening till we are in crisis because you will never get bipartisan support. Far easier for an opposition to say no to everything but blame the Govt for not achieving anything. The republicans have done this for years in the USA and look at how paralysed the country is from it.

Yep you are spot on, you shouldn't have to pay for the baby boomers and you won't have to pay for me.

We and most of our friends had four children, who we brought up. They are helping pay for my generation.

How many children are the "we want it now" generation having? How many children are you going to have?

Who is going to support them/you?

Nothing better than Karma.

 

[FlyingFox]

How many children are the "we want it now" generation having? How many children are you going to have?

Who is going to support them/you?

Have you actually thought about why that maybe? Could it be for some other reason other than the younger generations are selfish and stuck up?

Nothing better than Karma.

Hold that thought....

 

[sydboy007]

Yep you are spot on, you shouldn't have to pay for the baby boomers and you won't have to pay for me.

We and most of our friends had four children, who we brought up. They are helping pay for my generation.

How many children are the "we want it now" generation having? How many children are you going to have?

Who is going to support them/you?

Nothing better than Karma.

It seems difficult enough to pay for all the services we expect from Govt when there's around 4 tax payers per dependent.

How does it work in 2040ish when there's just 2.5 per dependent? Something like 25% of the population will be over 67 and receiving tax free income from super. How does that work?

 

[drsmith]

We have a class war, a sex war, I suppose, why not an age war.

When I calculated that super tax concessions + the pension > the same pension for all >= 65 (2011), my initial thought was to scrap all super tax concessions and just pay a non means tested pension. This though overlooks the fact that much of those super savings wouldn't be there to tax if there were no tax concessions.

 

[craft]

This though overlooks the fact that much of those super savings wouldn't be there to tax if there were no tax concessions.

Thats the rubber in the numbers - until this number is quantified its hard to really have a factual based discussions on appropriate levels of concessions.

 

[sptrawler]

It seems difficult enough to pay for all the services we expect from Govt when there's around 4 tax payers per dependent.

How does it work in 2040ish when there's just 2.5 per dependent? Something like 25% of the population will be over 67 and receiving tax free income from super. How does that work?

As craft says, it's all rubber numbers.

Take for example a couple retiring on full pension of say $30,000 and $300k in the bank at 5% = $15,000 total $45,000 + perks

Then look at a retired couple with $1.1m in in super earning 5% = $55,000 no pension at all and no perks.

So who is costing the most, just general approximate figures?

What is confusing the issue is, the couple aren't paying tax on the $55k.
But what is being forgotten is they aren't costing $30k + in Government handouts. That needs to be put into the equation.

 

[banco]

As craft says, it's all rubber numbers.

Take for example a couple retiring on full pension of say $30,000 and $300k in the bank at 5% = $15,000 total $45,000 + perks

Then look at a retired couple with $1.1m in in super earning 5% = $55,000 no pension at all and no perks.

So who is costing the most, just general approximate figures?

What is confusing the issue is, the couple aren't paying tax on the $55k.
But what is being forgotten is they aren't costing $30k + in Government handouts. That needs to be put into the equation.

Speaking of rubber numbers seems like the taxpayer will have to take a chunk out of the $55,000 been earned.

 

[sptrawler]

Speaking of rubber numbers seems like the taxpayer will have to take a chunk out of the $55,000 been earned.

Why do you think the couple who has saved $1.1m should pay tax on his $55k earnings? When they may have downsized and put $450k into their super.

While the couple on full pension + perks + $15k may live in a $15m house on Sydney harbour? With a family trust.

You have a different take on it, but hey it is in line with Labors.

 

[banco]

Why do you think the couple who has saved $1.1m should pay tax on his $55k earnings? When they may have downsized and put $450k into their super.

While the couple on full pension + perks + $15k may live in a $15m house on Sydney harbour? With a family trust.

You have a different take on it, but hey it is in line with Labors.

Because we are going to need the money to pay for their fellow boomers retirement. You think the younger generations should pay?

Plus if the goal is to keep them off the pension even if $5k was taken in tax from the $55k they still wouldn't qualify for a pension in your example.

 

[sptrawler]

Because we are going to need the money to pay for their fellow boomers retirement. You think the younger generations should pay?

Plus if the goal is to keep them off the pension even if $5k was taken in tax from the $55k they still wouldn't qualify for a pension in your example.

Who is paying for the person in the Mac Mansion, on full pension + $15k ?

 

[ROE]

Every generation has its rewards and challenges

class/age war fare is a dangerous game, it leads to resentment.

Focus more energy in creating opportunities for yourself...

 

[sptrawler]

Every generation has its rewards and challenges

class/age war fare is a dangerous game, it leads to resentment.

Focus more energy in creating opportunities for yourself...

Absolutely Roe, there seems to be a huge amount of effort, being spent by the younger generation in making a rod for their own backs.

 

[banco]

Every generation has its rewards and challenges

class/age war fare is a dangerous game, it leads to resentment.

Focus more energy in creating opportunities for yourself...

Bit late for that. First shots were fired when their patron awarded the oldies tax free pensions.

 

[sptrawler]

Bit late for that. First shots were fired when their patron awarded the oldies tax free pensions.

Who are you talking about now?

The ones on a tax free pension who spent their money?

Or the ones on a tax free pension who saved their money?

Or the multitude, who are arriving daily, that will end up on a tax free pension?

 

[sptrawler]

Jeez Banco I see you are still on line, was the question too hard.lol

 

[sydboy007]

interesting video made by the ATO

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Q0opp0YA_Q

 

[drsmith]

interesting video made by the ATO

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Q0opp0YA_Q

That's how you'd explain the concept of percentage to a child.

Not exactly a glowing endorsement of our education system.