The travel overseas plan for Pensioners is to be changed once again …by looking LIB Govt to introduce legislation to change the current 26 weeks to 6 weeks from 1st July 2017? it is a crying shame that the Lib Govt is always trying to hit the Pensioner/Retirees. This is a move to suck out whatever this Lib Govt can off the Pensioner/ Retirees income.
I hope it fails in the Senate… i urge a petition to the Senate be carried out by Choice on behalf of the community who will be most affected.
The other issue with pensions, especially self-funded retirees, is that the public are penalised and pensions reduced as soon as you make any little bit of money elsewhere - why then does the same not apply to politicians pensions??? Also, the gripe is that we are overspending, but not only is the cabinet now bigger than it has ever been - more of them to pay and less work being done, but employing an entire section of a department to monitor and send out stupid letters advising us that our pension has either been reduced or increased by a ridiculous amount of $1 or less - can we imagine the amount of money that is being spent on this banal exercise - much more than it will cost the government to just leave it and maybe correct the situation at tax time - self-funded retirees having to pay as much tax as they have to as well! A law for them and a law for us!
We all like to think . . “what is good for the goose . . .”
If politicians are serious, then it is high time for them to set an example and get rid of some of those overly generous and ridiculous politician lurks. Like the rest of us, their retirement benefits should be in proportion to how long they serve, and how much they contribute to their own superannuation, and they should not be paid any “retirement” (superannuation) benefits until they turn 65 years of age.
The same principle could also be applied to payment of welfare/aged pension payments to the rest of us.
It is just silly that Australians can get part of an aged penion and/or a seniors health card and own a multi-million dollar house and have other assets of over $750,000. The age pension (and other welfare benefits) should be reserved for those who are genuinely on LOW incomes.
My mother and step father aren’t self funded pensioners and live in a housing house, they got a $6 increase in the pension and then Wentworth housing puts their rent up $4 a fortnight. The government gives with one hand and takes with the other.
They wouldn’t mind but they are now paying $600 plus a fortnight and the housing sector still haven’t fixed the rising dump and the mould that arrives every winter.
It should be remembered that the rich (theoretically) pay far more taxes than we do - and so are entitled to the same pension we are., at the same age.
It takes away all stigma from the pension.
Sorry welfare payments are NOT an “entitlement” to people just because they have paid tax during their working life. Welfare is and should be a financial safety net - not a reward for paying tax. Unfortunately it is this type of “entitlement” thinking that is putting our country financially on its knees. Too many ‘well-off’ want to milk the welfare (and the taxation) system, politicians believe they can milk taxpayers well after they leave parliament, and some of those on welfare believe they are entitled to benefits without making any attempt to contribute to the community. It is high time the government showed some common sense and reined in these ridiculous excesses. And yes, I am well off, I do pay tax, and I don’t expect to dip my snout in the public purse just because I have paid tax all my working life.
I too am a self funded retiree, I worked full time from leaving school and never asked in my working life for nor was given any welfare. Didn’t get any assistance as a first home buyer or anything. Now I have a view that welfare is a noble and correct process in a modern compassionate society, but a couple of things get under my skin.
First is middle class welfare which has largely been used by successive governments to buy votes, these arrangements include very generous childcare arrangements, I don’t believe the state should be raising peoples children in the most formative pre-school years that is a parents responsibility.
Second group that gets under my skin is lifetime welfare recipients the people who game the system to get a payment to never work and then eventual get old enough to go on the age pension with little or no gainful employment history.
As I said earlier welfare is a noble process it should not be a lifestyle choice, it should be designed to keep the ‘wolves from the door’ during periods of unemployment and sickness and it should provide a safety net in post working years for members of society that have not been long enough in the compulsory superannuation system.
But society is ageing so a much larger welfare and health taxation burden is going to fall on a shrinking group of younger working Australians and that is not fair or sustainable and as such more needs to be done to target welfare to those who need it not just those who want it.
I can see the issues from a national perspective, my husband can’t and complains constantly that he won’t get the pension and also complains that he had to pay tax during his working life. The government mandated superannuation, so the nest egg has been growing, but he sees that as an asset to be passed on to his children, not what he was meant to live on in retirement. He doesn’t see it as coming from the Govt. He also rails against politicians’ pensions without knowing much about that either. He can’t understand that to genuine pensioners, he appears very rich, and his grandchildren will have to pay a much higher rate of tax to provide a pension he doesn’t need. When we visit his mates this mantra of “I should get the pension” and “all pollies are crooked” and “I shouldn’t have had to pay tax” goes on and on. I would like to say “Get Real!” but they don’t understand economics and scale. The best thing was the graph which came with the tax return showing what his tax funded. I agree that fiddling with the rules around pensions does cause problems with planning, but we seem to get a year or more notice. As for holidaying, I know some pensioners who live overseas, where their dollar goes further, for 6 months a year and some who have family overseas, who wish to spend extended time with them. Restricting it to 6 weeks is genuine holidays rather than living away where any other income might not be traceable. I personally think it should have been 8 weeks, with hardship provisions for, perhaps, family crisis. Not an issue I am totally up on as we are not pensioners. My sister-in-law is a single pensioner who struggles from day to day, country town rent, old car, paying off the tyres, etc These are the people who need it.
Yes indeed. I wonder if Turnbull and co will ‘get’ what dynamics are going on behind Brexit and the election of Trump. Citizens just want to do a Harry Potter on self-serving politicians and ‘obliviate’ them. All of them. Democratic governments are forgetting that democracies are supposed to work for citizens not against them or for Banks or any other commercial or financial vacuum. A democracy is meant to serve its citizens not its corporations. Now citizens are using their democratic vote to eliminate these bad decision makers who work against them but serve themselves. Pensioners are citizens, not cash cows. We only have one vote each but there are millions of us.
Well we were all told pay your income taxes and you are paying for your age pensions. And until 1950 there was a Pension Fund where the 7.5% levy went into for this purpose. Then Menzies, with Opposition Labor’s agreement shut this down so as to get the use these funds, which in 1999’s currency 2 billion - as told by a highly placed Treasury Official - now passed away - and this was sent to Consolidated Revenue to spent on anything, mainly catch up WW2 debts and the levy went along with the funds and although various Acts covering have been repealed, the levy was still being collected in 1990’s. And when questioned all politicians sing from same hymn sheet “it never happened”.
Now history shows Pension Act 1909 same year as UK set up. And pensions paid from there on - levy came later.
And UK also altered theirs in 1948 but still kept the contributions by workers to this day which is why all who have paid into the State Fund even billionaires can collect many dont bother.
Remember also when PM Howard granted the SFR the same concessions saying these ppl paid their taxes but dont draw down on the pension? And then later retracted it.
Really once and for all this needs to be brought out into the light.
Made sense to me when saw it printed in local paper and later on line. If UK did this and still do. We did too.
I do agree with some who say no one who hasn’t worked here should be eligible for the Age Pension. Which came about to support working people in the first place. Poor who didn’t work got sent to poor house back in old days. In USA they get food stamps. Here we give them everything earned by working people.
Not right is it? And why we re in such a pickle money wise borrowing 110 million each and every day just to run the country with over 1 billion interest each month. Yet people usually lefties in secure overpaid jobs cry out we’re a wealthy country bring in more and more to live off the welfare system and make the waiting lists for surgery longer and longer for those who have worked and dont deserve this. I’m all for put your money here your mouth is, want to support more refugees or likely economic migrants, pay extra income taxes.
Because its is those very people who are or have worked hard and paid all their income taxes broken no laws, and end up on age pension or dole who are being again and again kicked in the teeth by fellow citizens. We have not got enough jobs for those here now today.
Time to stop whinging and do something other than always picking on poorer people whilst still bringing on overseas people to add to the burden of welfare and later pensions. Time to start to stop the rorting of tax revenue by those who can and do. And also time to tell the UN we no longer need to be signatory to the outdated 1951 Refugee Convention which is root of the problem of boats and refugees today with 60 million on the move looking for places in western nations who can qualify seemingly all too often.
Time to stop picking on those who have always worked and paid in their fair share of income taxes and now need to be left alone with a decent pension as never had the super anyway as only arrived in 1990. And unless on public service pensions etc living off a below the poverty line age pension only allowed to earn a small amount each 2 weeks and if married, paid only 1 and a half age pensions between them. Yet all we hear is from those paid to care for elderly, the unemployed need an extra $50 a week, so why not the pensioner too then? Yes Gillard did give the single pensioner $30 a week back in 2009 but then took the married rate down from 167% of single paid to 150% to pay for it. Only Gottlebsen behind a pay wall reported that.
I am approaching retirement with trepidation I have a number of pension payments from overseas and super pension but see that the government is targeting pensioners to make up the shortfall in tax revenue. It is about time pensioners got together as a political force and showed the government we are not going to take reductions in our benefits and allowances without a fight… The baby boomers are not a minority and we do vote at the elections. Bryan
I do not understand why so many seniors vote conservative. The best example of how conservatives treat seniors most everywhere is evident in the USA. The American republicans have a plan for “protecting” social security (the national pension) that reduces benefits for everyone to eliminate the income tax the more well off pay on a portion of their social security benefits. I doubt most Americans earn enough in retirement to be liable for any or much of that offsetting tax on their benefit.
It is often cited that the most successful program conservatives have had, ever, is their uncanny ability to convince everyday people to vote against their own self interests to protect the more wealthy in society. In Australia we have far right conservatives on one side, and centre right conservatives on the other that differ mainly in their zeal when in government. Of course while in opposition each mob are aghast at our treatment by the government of the day, in order to solicit votes.
So what you are saying is that pensioners and other retirees that receive a government benefit should not vote conservative?
Unfortunately in a better world I would agree but the current political parties in Australia are so similar they are two sides of the same coin. Both pandering to the middle to win enough marginal seats to scrape together a working majority so they can continue to govern ineptly.
There is no vision or re-engineering of society to materially improve the lives of its citizens in either party’s views just more of the same muddling along.
I alluded to that by far right conservatives on one side, and centre right conservatives on the other that differ mainly in their zeal when in government.
I stand fast with my curiosity why seniors (and others in various circumstances) tend to vote for parties that clearly have little regard for their well being. My US example underscores that the vast number of senior average Americans who depend on social security for a good chunk of their retirement income voted for a party that openly and as part of their policy will reduce their benefits so the more well off can get a tax cut. Is that not curious?
Our Liberal party is anything but liberal, it oscillates between small l and big L Libertarian, which is (very simplistically) every person for themselves with government having as small a role as can be. Part of that philosophy is that if you cannot save for your own retirement, too bad. Same if you lose your job.
I disagree because during the Gillard days a lot was put on the table but the Just Say No opposition was very effective at stopping everything regardless of merit, with the sole purpose of destabilising a government. The blatant self serving partisanship in Canberra was and remains breathtaking with a “mandate” of 1 whole seat and a hostile senate. But I digress as my musing about voting is evolving into political discourse, so I’ll end my responses in this thread.
There seems to be that Pensioners are fair game when it comes to increased taxation and cut in benefits. I am nearing retirement and have maid monetary plans for my future only to see successive governments manipulate and make cuts. It’s about time the retirees took the government to task and ask for a stable fair deal without any interference and for them to look somewhere else to balance the budget.
Also there are more middle class and poor that pay taxes than rich. I’ve read all the replies and
agree with nearly all of them
In the GST Era we were told we needed GST or else we’d go bankrupt. Now ,years later, we
owe over a trillion dollars in debt. What happened ???
In the “recession, we had to have era”, it wasn’t 'the recession we had to have", it was the recession they (the pollies, paid to run our country) made us have.
Time is getting near to pay our rates. Along with other Councils, our rates went up. When someones cousins (who lived in Brighton) bragged that their rates were cheaper than ours, and
Council was asked for verification; they said “yes”, because their council area is smaller.
Give me a breakkkkk…excuses, excuses. Council special: pay rates 9 mos. in advance and you can get some kind of hokie gift. What a break…
