Born in 1943, I’m pre-boomer and, if they still use the description, a ‘war baby’.

I actually like high interest rates to improve my investments. I think that around 40% of the population feels the same way, compared with about 25% of the population with mortgages who don’t. Interest rates are ‘high’ only because most people are fools with money and don’t know how to control what they have.

I don’t believe that I have “precisely the same concerns as other voters”, as the author opines and, for a fair dinkum conservative, there is really is no candidate in my electorate to vote for, particularly the sitting Liberal candidate who, like his party, is no more conservative than the ALP candidate who is a totally unknown female. There’s no point in mentioning the Democrats and Greens.

Now, I don’t expect people to wring their hands in sympathy for me. But I and other truly conservative people are effectively disenfranchised in Australia.

“You little beauty”, a high number of OLO posters would say. But the paucity of political choice in Australia is the reason we are such a soft, wet society where most labels say ‘Made in China’, and where national pride has all but disappeared under oppressive government multiculturalism and both major parties’ bone-headed high immigration policies and slack importation of so-called refugees totally unsuited to any Western society.

We don’t necessarily need a hard right government. But we should have enough realists in politics to restore the balance before it’s too late: people with more intellect and ability than the One Nation losers whom no self-respecting person could vote for.

No matter which party forms Government this weekend, we will continue on the same down hill run

While not being (quite) as old as Leigh I must say I share his take on interest rates. They are only a problem for people who have not managed their situation properly. If one is borrowing money (and I borrow lots) you need to be sure that you can repay under a range of possible adverse conditions over which you have no control. The people today who are bleating the loudest about what is actually a reasonably modest interst rate are the people whio have over-committed themselves with McMansions, plasma TVs, and 4WDs. They are people for whom I have little sympathy.

Mr Smith, I don't wholeheartedly agree with most of the premises you put forward except for the last paragraph. I'm not moaning , I say that merely to illustrate that differences of opinion are good things.
I'm a baby boomer, and I'm OK! But I wasn't always a baby boomer. I started off as a kid with one single toy (blue car). I went to school where the Headmaster taught Grades 3-6 and then was packed off to relatives for High School. I left school to an apprenticeship paying $28 a week and was so consistently broke that I had to walk the entire length of Oxford Rd to my flat because I couldn't afford the bus. I was a Nasho, went to SVN and got wounded by a food vendor. I came home as a triumphant warrior and was greeted by a 'worker' saying "Sort it out yourself mate. Your problem."
I married and had three kids on one wage and struggled along, saving for a house by eating baked beans, day-old bread and plain wrap food. I sat on my banana lounge in the late 70's and read the "please take over my mortgage" ads.
Things improved, the kids left home, I quit smoking, my wife got a job, we got a better car, then a second car, then a house, then a better house. Spare money became savings instead of spendings, until now I am independently retired and suck nothing from the Government.
I went without material things to get to my present modest position, and yet now I am considered a drain on public health by people without private cover, a drain on the public purse by folks who p*ss their money up against the wall, and am accused of driving up housing prices by people who happily take on $500K mortgages thinking the good times will last forever.
Don't lump me in with some kind of Grey Voter crap and categorise me with generalisations simply because I was born in 1948. My problems are mine, as everyone else's are theirs, and we are all individuals.

I am old enough to be the parent of a baby boomer and so I am white-haired not grey. I am a "self-funded" retiree. But I do not praise myself for this, I have been lucky, chosen occupations that had superannuation, and had been taught to be frugal by my parents. So there is nothing self congratulatory in my description as self rather than government funded.
Even with long years of democratic participation I have not finally worked out whether it be best for each individual to vote for his or her own self interest - so that in aggregate the result is optimal. Or whether folk ought try to vote for the common good. In this election I am aiming to vote for my perception of the common good - but I realise that I can afford to do this. Others on the breadline might need to vote for self interest. I loathe the attempted briberies of this campaign by both major parties.

What we need is some more action by senior Australians, now that their numbers are increasing, to alter society to suit us more.

A few suggestions:

1. We need a new political party, the Senior Drivers Party, to change the traffic laws to suit us more. For starters, we could have a period each day of speed restriction to 25 Km/h from 12 to 2pm so that traffic noise would not disturb seniors having a nap. (What a good idea for the Legislative Council!).

2. Now that the labour market has been deregulated, we need de-regulation of immigration, so we can bring in a young girl from Bangladesh to keep house for us, and in return would get her meals and pocket money of $20 per week.

3. The pension age should be raised each year by one year, to prevent any further people qualifying, so that current pensioners would not become a burden on the government.

If policies like these are implemented life for retirees could become much more pleasant.

Golly.. we are a mob of old codgers arn't we :)

Fencepost.. I was born in 48 also. Seems like most of us are 'old dogs' so.. trying to persuade each other about 'new tricks' might be a bit formiddable.

But you and I can look at Leigh and say 'You old git' :) (no offense Leigh)

Hmm.. we could name the Grey party "Old Dogs-NO new tricks" Party.

Looks like i'm the youngster here.I was hatched in 51.Funnily enough i still feel like i'm 16.Must admit i have taken to covering the mirrors as some trickster has put pictures of a wrinkled old bag on all of them.
It won't make a difference who wins the election as i'm hoping to get oldtimers and forget the whole bloody thing.I live a simple life and as long as i have enough to pay the bills,buy some food and ciggies(yes i'm one of those that hasn't quit but still disgustingly healthy) i'm happy.
Own one house,two cars , one husband and many memories.Don't need much money for all that so i don't really care who wins.I actually think the baby boomers probably cost the country less than most.

Well Haygirl, I couldn't resist. I had to top you on age. I was '54'(Jan) baby and still remember the late 50's and most of the 60's as the best years this country ever saw. No World wars, no pollution, a simpler lifestyle and great hope for the future. Then came a succession of ever useless politicians World wide.

Like yourself Haygirl, I live a simple life. I only work part time since I wouldn't know what to do with any extra money. I spent years working bloody hard to keep two kids clothed, fed and educated and am now enjoying a downsized lifestyle (except for all those Christmas presents....grandkids, you know!)

Leigh, Raynard, I agree with everything you said. Younger people these days have no idea of saving for something and actually having to 'wait' to enjoy the fruits of their labor and I blame Government policies for much of this. Which ever mob gets into power after Saturdays elections, all we'll get is more of the same. Both major parties will continue to preach the mantra of greed.
Aime.

What an illuminating thread this is:

So far I've detected a bunch of right-wing, Christian racists who eschew tolerance !

You fall VERY nicely into john Howard's model for the functioning future of Australia:

This is REALLY what he wants:

Skip all the intermediate steps (saves all the inconvenient "debating in Parliament" and argy bargy with Unions and lawyers) and go straight to this!

1. Abolish all paid benefits to all workers immediately. (John Howard has nearly done this to date)
2. Those who object to this, should be sacked immediately (and they already have been). They can try to find the money to fight a court case for "unlawful dismissal".
3. Immediately coerce (did I say that!) remaining employees into signing Australian Workplace Agreements that are internationally competitive (this is in the papers every week now); where pay rates will be matched with, and pegged to, those equivalent workers in India (and paid in Rupees) or China (and paid in Yuan).
4. Anyone who doesn't sign an AWA - refer to point 2 above.
5. Offer jobs to any/all of the following:
(a) sacked workers who have since applied to Centrelink (who will be refused unemployment benefits unless they take the job at the internationally competitive (lowest) pay rates on offer);
(b) migrants who aren't used to prior working conditions (John Howard is bringing them in by the boatload)
(c) any other worker in the world who will work for the (lowest) internationally competitive pay rates on offer.
6. Use the highest wages differential of any country (Brazil as a benchmark). Aim to quadruple the spread by 2008 (unless the Rupee/AUD or Yuan/AUD is larger).
7. Anyone who complains about the government will be imprisoned for sedition or as a suspected terrorist under current draconian laws.

Think I'm joking? Read the newspapers again !

Results of above plan

Those who are left will:

1. Be referred to Centrelink who will refer them to 5(a) above.
2. If unsucessful, apply to nearest Charity (Smith Family/ St Vincent de Paul/ Salvation Army) who will be overwhelmed and under funded (since those in a job cannot afford to give to charity and those who can afford to give to a charity will say "let the bludgers starve").
3. Sell children to business owner who wants to provide employment for "youth unemployed". Promised to provide food & board in exchange for 20 hours, 7 days work a week.
4. Take up residence in nearest cardboard box (Eddy Avenue is full now).
5. Wonder whether it is worth continuing to live.

Exclusions to this plan are:

1. Sick, injured, infirm, old (that means YOU LOT) or mentally ill. YOU are not economically viable "production units" (see Ayn Rand: Atlas Shrugged; speech by John Galt) and should be eliminated immediately. Suggest they be "released into the community" and/or incarcerated in a prison. Possible alternative is the Auschwitz solution (Arbeit Macht Frei rule) for all.
2. Business Owners. They supply the capital and need to concentrate it at much as possible in the hands of the fewest. Hence the need to lower wages and conditions.
3. Politicians. These guys help re-engineer the society which will keep all the "production units" in production.

Iluvatar “a bunch of right-wing, Christian racists who eschew tolerance !”

At least they have “values”.

The most depressing thing I find with many posters, of younger years, is the “expectation to entitlement” rather than “values”.

An expectation the government will appoint a bureaucrat to wipe their hairy arses for them or nurse them from cradle to grave and make sure no one is allowed to aspire to more than the level of mediocrity of the masses.

I have no idea how old Iluvatar might be but anyone who thinks of people in terms of “economically viable "production units"” needs to reconsider their understanding of “individuals” (young and old) and maybe seek some remedial education (to fill in their lacklustre days as they wait in the queue at centrelink.).

The voting population is limited to those over 18, due to the immaturity of under 18’s, seen in the inability of infants and toddlers to comprehend a senate voting form (oh, that applies to the entire population not only infants). Hence, the older end of the population demographics vote with more significance than their proportion of total population

But we still vote. In my case I still pay taxes, both state and federal. I recall the old cry “no taxation without representation”. I do not think any government could afford to disenfranchise the “grays” at the expense of our tax contributions.
Although, in Victoria I would happily surrender my voting rights and take back the swath of monies this socialist state extort from me every year.

So Iluvatar, I would suggest you scrape some funds together and go and buy out one of those “business owners” you are complaining about. Then you could exploit your own workers all you want and be on what you see as the “winning side”.

Only problem is, as a business owner, you would have to wear the risk of failure from your own decisions.

And without a nanny state holding your safety net and dummy, doubt you would be up for that

As a 29 year old, I find the views towards young people unbelievable. Many of you label us as lazy, that we don't know how to save, and that it serves us right if rising interest rates cause us mortgage stress as we are foolish with money. What you fail to realise is that, through no fault of our own, house prices have risen astronomically such that we now have to spend a far higher proportion of our lifetime's earnings on basic housing than previous generations, meaning that we are hundreds of thousands of dollars financially worse-off than our parents or grandparents were at the same age.

As an example, my wife and I recently purchased an unrenovated 2 bedroom 12 square house on a subdivided block in Ashburton, Melbourne. It cost us $500k - or 10 times my after-tax income. We also saved $126k to cover the 20% deposit and $26k in taxes (equivalent to 2.5 years after-tax income). In the 1970s, the same house would have sold for 3-4 times my income. I know this because my blue-collar father bought a similar house in Malvern (a far better and more expensive suburb) on a larger block for 6 times his unskilled income. We don't have an extravagant lifestyle. Hell, we drive a 1985 Toyota Corona. And another thing, most of the people I know with plasma TVs etc are cashed up Baby Boomers.

Give us a break and get off your high horse.

Col Rouge:

Isn't it amazing what a bit of freshly-baked irony will do to get the juices flowing. What is more interesting is, that you appear to actually believe some of my previous posting points. (It says A LOT about you).

Anyway, thanks for the words of "wisdom". I'll take them on board and deal with them appropriately.

I don't have any “expectation to entitlement” just an expectation that people behave rationally (which is VERY hard). Religion disqualifies most people here.

Like you, I pay my taxes and I vote, but I haven't seen much rationality amongst politicians lately.

RE: Buying 'out one of those “business owners” '. I don't need to do that mate! As a quad-degreed professional I have been self employed for over 30 years and reckon I can just about survive without a bunch of whingeing employees. However, it doesn't meant they don't have an expectation to entitlement (like a minimum wage). Oops, sorry, a minimum internationally-competitive wage - those Chinese/Indian peasants are getting paid more now.

I think Australia has been sold/flushed down the toilet by the economic rationalists for over a decade now. So John Howard has been all to ready to pull the chain.....(and retire on his taxpayer-funded pension).

Leith, my perspective is almost the opposite - I'm quite well aware that my wife and I aren't always the most responsible budgeters, and have lived beyond our means at times. But, largely due to the fortune of natural abilities that have enabled us to succeed in well-paying jobs, combined with a generally fortunate upbringings, we've never genuinely struggled at all, and now that we both work full-time, are easily paying off our debts, and could handle another several interest rate rises without any great stress. So if the biggest crime was having high expectations and not knowing how to manage money, then why are we escaping punishment?

I also believe that frugality is to a large extent a skill that has to be learned - our natural inclination is to satisfy our instincts where possible. Those who grew up earlier generations had little choice but to learn frugality, whereas more recent ones generally haven't had the need (or opportunity).

Either way, blaming others for their inability to manage money is not particularly helpful.

Wizofaus. By your thread, I'm not sure whether you understood my post. I was simply responding to the numerous negative comments by older bloggers that young people are lazy, don't save, irresponsible with money, and therefore deserve to get hammered by higher interest rates.

The fact remains that housing has risen to such a level that younger buyers have no choice but to take on large debts (on two incomes) just to afford a basic house, so to label us as financially irresponsible is both unfair and misguided. This situation contrasts to older generations who were generally able to afford cheap well located housing on a single income.

So its a bit rough to attack the young simply because they have borrowed heaviliy and are sensitive to interest rate rises as many of us have had little choice. My situation, where my wife and I saved $125k over 8 years to cover the 20% deposit and stamp duty (equal to 2.5 years of my after tax income), is just one example where, despite being strong savers and financially responsible, we will still get burnt by rising interest rates [we still owe $350k, so each 0.25% interest rate rise costs us $875 in additional annual interest]. This isn't something that previous generations had to worry about simply because they bought their houses so cheaply.

Leith, I understood it...the point is that I would accept the "lazy, doesn't save, irresponsible with money" charge...and yet we haven't been "hammered" by interest rates. So the fact that others have can't simply be put down to their own actions. Circumstance has a good deal to do with it.

Great article, Tony!
This sentence says it all:
"The campaign focus on key marginals and key demographics actually corrupts the search for the good society."

Well said Leith - good to see someone bringing a bit of balance in to this debate.

At present, there seems to be a perception from the older generation that the only reason why the youth could possibly be having money troubles is if they're wasting their money on ridiculous fripperies. How dare they!

Perhaps it's not surprising that there's a similarly flawed view from the younger set in response, that the elderly are simply conservative windbags who want to stitch up Australia from foreigners while upping the pension and making the youth work harder.

Truth of the matter is, there are youth who waste money, but as Leith points out, there are plenty who don't.

In a previous thread I made the point that I had to work full time while also studying to get through university, which in the past, was completely paid for by the government.
Now we have HECS and the Ausstudy payments aren't enough to live by.
The response was essentially that the only reason why the youth could be doing it tough was if they were wasting their money.
That may be the case for some who have family money to support them, but for others it isn't.

It's quite concerning that so many older people have that perception.

What's heartening however, is that on balance, there are also plenty of older people who don't fit that stereotype either, and are keen to elect a government with a bit more moral backbone, for the sake of their grandchildren.

My informants have just extracted a HOWARD CONFESSION which is:

"I'VE GOT $4 MILLION IN (TAXPAYER OVERSUBSIDISED) SUPERANNUATION. SO LONG SUCKERS :)"

Definitely the last animation of Johnny H (we hope).

Here's the link:

http://media.theaustralian.news.com.au/nich/20071123_secret_video.htm

Do not watch this before the election (if YOU dare).

Cheers

Poida

"No fool like an old fool", my grandmother is fond of saying. Honestly, if any political party thinks that buying the "grey vote" is easy they are bigger fools than anyone gives them credit for. Grey voters are not swing voters by and large, opinions tend to get set with age. OLO is an excellent example for anyone who wants evidence, just look at 'em all. They'd all be better off being seen trying to give the youngsters a chance, even grey voters would vote for that, after all many of them have grandchildren and many aren't so self-centred as to even suggest that they can be bought to the detriment of their families. Most will vote as what they think will be the best for their families, so the "family vote" is much more important really.

And Leigh, if you want to be counted as a "pre-boomer", forget it. 1943 is the same demographic. You are definitely not part of the significant generation before you. That was the "greatest generation" and they were your parents.

Tony, tony, tony.

Every group in society is separated out, divided and valued differently by Political Parties every campaign. Set against each other. Racial groups are always ignored and targetted for political gain so if you are in those groups and elderly you know your future if you care to look and listen. Pensioners are supposed to be excited about $2 increases in pensions. Etc, while politicians vote themselves massive annual $ increases.

Various groups get attention at varying times. Usually the older people get less attention simply because they will die sooner than the rest of society in general.

This is particularly so for Forces veterans. They are ignored and claims for damage ignored until their numbers have decreased through dying to make it economical to show "compassion". By all colours of government.

Just as mentally ill people are ignored as they are too easy to label and demonise.

Every government makes decisions about who they will throw money at. Between elections that tends to be because of the Leader's own preferences. At election time it is decided on who is making the most noise. Who is most likely to cause a change of government. Or lose you votes.

Howard yesterday made that clear during several interviews when he said "I'm not talking to the people who have already decided. I'm talking to those whose votes are still up for grabs."

Lesson? Never say you have made a decision as that excludes you from consideration. Always answer polls with "haven't decided" or "Don't know yet" etc.

Never is there a focus on all. And will never be under our current style of politician.