The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Pensions are charity > Comments

Pensions are charity : Comments

By David Leyonhjelm, published 17/2/2015

If anything, I and my fellow baby boomers should pay the rest of Australia a lump sum when we retire, to cover the debt we are leaving.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All
A well-considered article on the topic of retirement incomes. As a baby-boomer, I have benefited from education and health services and am happy paying income tax for as long as I earn. Providing for income streams beyond the age of retirement is the responsibility for all of us with the means and ability. Raising the retirement age to 70 is inevitable. The only objection to the increased age is in consideration of those who rely on a fit, strong body to earn a living. The article's note on disability support pension addresses that question.
Posted by Anthony, Tuesday, 17 February 2015 6:20:24 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well I am proud to say that I did not vote for Kevin 07, nor Julia, nor Kevin again, so I DO NOT take responsibility for the blow out in the debt.

I was very happy with our position before big Kev came to town.
Posted by rehctub, Tuesday, 17 February 2015 6:32:04 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There is no point in buying a home if you can't leave it to your children. People can hardly be blamed for the housing boom which turned modest family homes into million dollar assets.
Most couples worked extremely hard to buy these homes whilst raising children without the help from government that parents receive from government these days.
The costs of buying and maintaining a home far outway the expense of renting privately or depending on government housing.
If family homes are to be counted as an asset fewer people will buy them, rather spending their money on holidays and entertainment, leaving them dependant on public housing after their superannuation has run out.
So, on top of providing an aged pension, the government will have to provide more housing for the elderly as well.
Posted by Big Nana, Tuesday, 17 February 2015 8:41:53 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
So the only reason for buying a home is so you can leave it to your children?
Posted by ateday, Tuesday, 17 February 2015 8:48:14 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
rehctub, the debt's continued to blow out under Abbott, so your protestations of innocence are meaningless! The debt's mainly due to the economic cycle rather than government policy.
Posted by Aidan, Tuesday, 17 February 2015 9:20:00 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
>So the only reason for buying a home is so you can leave it to your kids< What rubbish! One buys a house to live in it, pay it off and leave it to the kids.

After all that's the only chance many of them will have to own a home and or get out from under the greedy price gouging landlord.

If welfare is just for the needy, why is so much being given to the greedy! i.e., negative gearing, millionaires tax concessions on their super, and family trusts, which by the way, also go to the kids, allegedly!

I paid tax at the top rate and in part helped to pay for Telstra, Qantas, T.A.A, Dozens of power companies and insurance companies and banks, with the CBA still remaining the biggest and most profitable.

Had government not sold these things, that we oldies paid for; the combined return would have paid all of the old age pensions.

And there were only sold because successive government gave away the mining boom, and far too much middle class welfare as pork barreling/vote buying.

And now pensioners/home owners who worked hard all their lives for their humble abodes, are expected to pay for what?

What about those who are so called pensioners, able to play the pokies live in veritable mansions,take an overseas trip every year and still collect a full or in part pension.

Someone on David's income and with his generous pension entitlements should have to pay fr his own retirement.

But particularly if he get a federal parliamentary pension/super; and a state one as well?

On one thing we can agree welfare is for the needy, not the greedy!
Rhrosty.
Posted by Rhrosty, Tuesday, 17 February 2015 9:35:51 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy