Well researched and thoughtful article. We could do well by following Singapore's pragmatism, which seems to include more public ownership of income earning commercial enterprise, and consequent less tax? We seemed to have done the opposite and sold off income earning enterprise to temporarily reduce personal tax burdens and or provide handouts for the better off and or wealthy?
This has resulted in a structural deficit, which now must be addressed. Genuine tax reform and quite massive simplification could achieve that without including any real financial pain; in fact just the opposite! However, if Abbot becomes our next PM, the revenue needed, will likely come from those on the lower end of the socio-economic ladder? Well, Joe Hockey has as good as flagged that very outcome? Besides, welfare for the rich and its handmaiden, work choices, was conservative policy and maybe still is, albeit, thinly veiled or disguised with different labels? Work choices will never ever be reintroduced? Never ever? Is that a yet another non core coalition promise like that, which saw an never ever economy contracting GST reintroduced? How will further reduction of discretionary spending help, or produce more returns or tax revenue? Well? Rhrosty.

A fine article. One minor crit is that Australia doesn't have a retirement age. It will be interesting to see what Swannie does in the Budget for older workers and job seekers. We're at the leading edge od the Boomer demographics now. Tokenism will be scorned.

An ageing Australia is the subject of a great deal of scaremongering. Hopefully governments will recognise that "equal opportunity" means "without disadvantage or discrimination". Clearly there is government policy which discriminates against and disadvantages older Australians.

Singapore has shown that older workers can be employed, to their benefit and the benefit of the country. This example demonstrates that Australia’s so-called aging crisis is nothing of the sort. The issue is far less than a crisis and can be dealt with using the right sort of management strategy.

The absurd solution has been to keep up our very high immigration rate of younger people. It has now become bleedingly obvious that this has been just another excuse spouted by the big business sector and our kowtowing government to maintain this ridiculous level of immigration.

Earth calling Fester, earth calling fester ...all of the reports and news stories point to systemic age discrimination in the private and public sectors and especially in recruitment.

Ah Herr Ludwig, one of the Sustainable People Faction - it is good that you have raised your head. The Sustainables want zero immigration and one child per family. Think of a boot pressed firmly against the face of humanity forever. That's the Sustainable People Lobby.

I also suspect they want monies for age care channeled in to 'euthenising' people over 70. Imagine the savings!

Nutters apart, there has been small but noticable shifts over the last 18 months about employers attitudes to hiring and retaining mature age workers. Lets hope that continues.

<.all of the reports and news stories point to systemic age discrimination in the private and public sectors and especially in recruitment.>

Hmmm. Perhaps they get sucked in by all that ageing catastrophe rot, where old people are portrayed as demented and useless? I thought your tribe was responsible for that nonsense, C, not the ZPGers.