By 2041 it is expected that there will be 6.66 million Australians aged 65 and over, an increase of 54% on the number recorded at the 2021 census. The over 65's are by far the fastest growing age group in the country. The older the age group the greater the increase, those aged 85 plus are expected to grow by 140% to 1.28 million by 2041. The age growth is expected to accelerate after 2031 as the 'Baby Boomers', those bore between 1946 and 1965 enter the over 85 plus age cohort.

What impact will an ageing population have on Australia? As a general rule, older people are less productive, and the older we get the less productive we become, and the less income we have, that is a natural consequence of ageing. It is obvious that the demand for aged services in health, housing and generally can only increase. The burdon of the elderly is going to fall more and more onto the diminishing numbers of younger people in the productive section of society. Will younger Australia step up and meet the challenge of an ageing population, and help provide a quality of life that older Australian expect and are entitled to. This means a greater proportion of taxation being spent on others (the elderly), whilst at the same time, still meeting the expectations of the younger taxpayers themselves. Challenging times ahead.

the older we get the less productive we become,
Paul1405,
That's the idea of getting old. What is not the idea is to be so unproductive as the young are now ! They're the ones you're talking about or rather should !
The old of today have been largely productive par the few tens of thousands of bureaudroids among us Baby boomers. Today's old have planned & contributed for the support they're getting now just as we have supported the old when we were younger. Your generation will have to wake up & start living within their means rather than their wants & stop blaming the old.

>As a general rule, older people are less productive
Really? People tend to be at their highest paid just before they retire.

And don't know how others feel about it, but I don't intend to retire until I'm well into my 70s. Being late entering the workforce, it makes sense that I also be late leaving it.

Dear Aidan,

«Being late entering the workforce, it makes sense that I also be late leaving it.»

Well it does not make sense to me - having been lucky, count your blessings!

Australia should count its blessings.

Every day across the country older Australians
make an enormous contribution to our society.

They contribute so much each year in unpaid caring
and volunteer work. If this unpaid contribution of
older Australians was counted it would amount to
billions of dollars to the bottom line of our economy.

Older Australians should be recognised for their role
in building strong and healthy communities.

Being labelled "too old" or "past their use by date"
means that so many may miss out on work, training,
study, and other opportunities. We need to realise
that many older Australians live independently at
home. They enjoy one of the highest life expectancies
in the world. Only 1 in 4 aged 85 or over lives in
care accommodation.

Volunteering among the "baby boomers"
generation recently retired, healthy and wanting to
contribute to their communities is continuing to rise
compared to previous generations. Increasing paid
employment of Australians over 55 years could add
billions to the bottom line of our economy every year.

We need to make changes in our mindsets at the way we view
older Australians and treat them accordingly. Then perhaps
the future for all of us not only the over 65 year olds
would be brighter.

Dear Foxy,

Thank you for your contribution.

Indeed it is wonderful when older people are able to participate in LIFE rather than in the stifling money-based "economy". The earlier they exit the formal economic mechanisms, free of bosses, formalities, procedures and financial considerations, free to contribute from their hearts by their own values - the better!

Shall we strive to gradually lower that age of freedom from formal economy and aim for 0% employment and the end of all slavery by 2100?

Yuyutsu wrote: "Shall we strive to gradually lower that age of freedom from formal economy and aim for 0% employment and the end of all slavery by 2100?"

A noble goal. Automation extended world wide with those designing the automata doing it for love.

Seems to have got away from the thrust of the argument. I'm talking what will develop over the next 20 years and beyond, 2041. The elderly will be an ever increasing percentage of the population, gave some statistics for that, and there is no reason to doubt that isn't the trajectory for our society. Fewer children, more older non productive people, few productive workers paying tax. The dilemma presented by this scenario is simple; With an ever increasing number of non productive in the aged sector, will the ever decreasing numbers of productive taxpayers be able to, or want to, supply the needs of the non productive aged section of society.

Indy, you tell us the idea is to get old so you can be less productive. Okay, whatever works for you.

Aidan, " People tend to be at their highest paid just before they retire." That may be so, but there are other factors and pay is not always an indicator of productivity. Seniority and longevity in the organisation is often a factor. If productivity was the sole determinant of remuneration then people like professional tennis players would be in trouble. I note you say "just before they retire", how's their productivity and income 20 or 30 years after retirement? As their income producing assets are run down. In fact if you are living off investments you still need productive people to generate wealth so you can receive an income from those assets.

Yuyutsu, thanks

Foxy, what you say about older Australians contributing through volunteering is very true, but that does not elevate future demands on heath, housing and general aged services that will needed to be supplied by a diminishing number of taxpayers.

The 2021 Intergenerational Report covering the next 40 of the economy prepared by Treasury, paints a picture of a declining workforce, and at the same time a far greater demand on aged services being supplied by government.

Something to ponder,

If half of Australians 13.25 million were suddenly turned into centenarians, with the other half in support how well off would we be? Both halves.

Dear Paul,

I certainly don't have all the answers. However I
feel that if we as a society tried to change our
mindsets about older people we may improve things
for everybody.

By that I mean that if older Australians were
regarded as important contributors to the country's
labour force and if we allowed older people who are
able to work, and want to continue working being
employed would help not only in maintaining their good health,
and maintaining diversity in the workforce, it would reduce the
demand for publicly funded pensions.

Just a thought.

cont'd

There also would be advantages for the other half -
for younger people to garner the experience and skills
that older people possess in their professions. Passing
their information and skills to younger people would be
beneficial to us all.

you tell us the idea is to get old so you can be less productive.
Paul1405,
Gawd, you're one twisted git ! Most retired now have already contributed way more than you ever will !
When we got old enough we retired therefore we're now less productive. That's the idea ! Git !

I'm not old, it's simply not true
My heart is young, the time just flew
I'm staring at this strange old face
Who's that standing in my place?

My body's not in disrepair
Although there's grey in my thick hair
I sometimes feel a little tired
But in my mind I dance inspired

This old age thing is not for me
I prefer to continue to be free
I'll just pretend I'm in my prime
To age too fast would be a crime

I'm just 40 in my head
It's still so long until I'm dead
So please don't see me in that way
I'm staying young, if that's OK.

Did I touch a raw nerve with you Indy, therefore the name calling. There are millions in the world who at the end of their productive working life receive no 'aged welfare' from government, their governments can't afford it. They have to rely on charity or family or begging for support, that was once the case in our own society. The truth is taxpayers today have no economic obligation to support the non productive, but most consider there is a moral obligation as a caring supportive society to do so. There is enough tax revenue, and enough available within the means of government to support those of age who can no longer support themselves adequately. Indy to rationalise his dependence on welfare has invented a 'magic pot' that according to him, he contributed to throughout his working life, no matter how short that was, no such 'magic pot' ever existed. Any tax paid back in the day was used in the day, governments saving for the future was never a consideration. Today we simply borrow on top of taxation to finance today, hence a trillion dollars of national debt. Australia has become a 'debtor nation'.

As the population grows older and more dependent on government support, and the tax revenue reduces relative to those needs, and given there are other competing needs and wants for taxpayer dollars, and a general desire for lower taxes, where will the money come from to meet the requirements non self sufficient elderly in society.

Dear Paul,

«The elderly will be an ever increasing percentage of the population»

Not "ever", just over a few generations, hopefully only 3-4 generations until population drops drastically and stabilises at much lower levels. This is an inevitable correctional crisis resulting from overpopulation and any crisis implies a degree of pain.

There are no painless solutions, but here are a few things that could mitigate the pain:

1. Move workers from non-productive paper-shuffling jobs into essential production and aged-care. Any cut in governmental regulation and red-tape will free hoards of lawyers, accountants and other uselesses from the compliance-sector into useful work. Same for the advertising industry: make advertising unprofitable by stopping to recognise advertising expenses as tax-deductible.

2. Send all non-violent prisoners to work in aged/disability-care instead (this will also free up many of their jailers).

3. Allow temporary carer-visas for potential aged-care workers from 3rd-world countries (especially the Philippines), who will very happily stay with an elderly person at their home, caring for them 24/7 (or 24/6) in order to feed their families back home. Philippine people are known to be naturally caring and loyal and are generally only interested in work, not migration.

4. As population reduces and procreation is discouraged, there will be no need for new homes and infrastructure, freeing up most builders. There will be plenty of existing houses for everyone and all that will be needed is maintenance work. With fewer children, fewer schools will remain, which can also free up many teachers.

5. Make it unprofitable to produce (or import) electrical/mechanical products that aren't likely to last for at least 20 years, by stopping to recognise their production-inputs as tax-deductions.

6. Cancel the Christmas shopping culture. Neither the young nor the old need these "gifts", which pressures them to produce and throw away more unnecessary goods.

Did I touch a raw nerve with you Indy, therefore the name calling.
Paul1405,
Hinting at your character is a long way from name calling. I just shudder to think that characters such as you are being fostered by the Public Service unions courtesy via the Peter Principle !

Hi Yuyutsu,

Good ideas need implementation. But often "radical" changes proposed require an attitudinal change from society as a whole. In my opinion social support for the elderly is now at its zenith, and unless conditions change, that support will decline into the future as the proportion requiring support increases. The Aged Care Royal Commission highlighted systemic problems within the aged care sector.

Hi Indy,

Calling someone a "git" is name calling. I though your nonsense about the public service was just you being stupid, but now I realise you actually believe your own delusional crap.

your nonsense about the public service
Paul1405,
Again, as per your usual you're deflecting from the real issue & twist words. It's not the Public service as such that I'm drawing attention to, only the Public Servants such as the category you're rather obviously are part of. The incompetent/corrupt/indifferent who really deserve their own apt description of bureaudroid. Public servants who, unlike their many decent & conscientious colleagues, are simply failing in their daily duties & therefore failing those who need help the most. Current affair shows etc are hardly ever without without a case involving some bureaucratic failing.
Everyone can make mistakes but when it comes to perpetual mismanagement condoned by the relevant unions then I don't think such bureaucrats should allowed to be so defensive of their incompetence & remain in their positions & continue to do great economic & social harm !

Dear Paul,

Yes, some of my suggestions are radical and would require more time and pain before understood by society, but how about my 3rd point to allow temporary carer-visas for potential aged-care workers from 3rd-world countries, thus allowing the elderly with savings (and/or private insurance) to support themselves and be cared for in their own homes in their final years? It cannot be that radical because other countries already have this.

Dear Paul,

Lets not forget that the people who receive government
subsidied aged care also help with the cost if they
can afford to. They do this by paying aged care fees
and charges. A basic daily fee. A means-tested additional
service fee. An accommodation payment or contribution.
Their pension also goes to their provider. So it works out.

The Australian government pays aged care service providers to
deliver aged care through subsidies and supplements through
capital grants for aged care services and through program
funding.

We can criticize any government supported initiatives - be
they in aged care, child care, hospitals, education, infrastructure
or anything else. There are economic experts available to advise
what and who should be supported and why.

It's part of good
economic management and problem solving. Concerns about where
the money is going to come from is part and parcel of
the job of Treasury and its economic advisers. It's up to them
to find a balance so that our economy not only survives but
thrives.

WTF?

According to ANU estimates in Australia only about 58% of households are net tax payers.

Therefore a large number of Australians go their whole life being subsidised by others.

This includes many who have employment and have tax removed from their pay. They get more back in direct benefits then they pay out.

Then there are all the indirect benefits associated with education, health care and other benefits.

GST is usually unavoidable but many of those self-employed still deal in cash payments and utilise "mates' rates" avoiding even more tax.

So there are many who will say "I've worked hard all my life and contributed all my life and now I deserve my pension and other benefits." who have been on the public teat all their lives.

WTF?_Not Again,
Donations, Negative gearing & entertainment allowances ! All the things the "good' people exploit without a thought to those who pay Tax !

This is old news.

These projections were made a decade ago. There will be more people retiring, more need for medical care and much of the tax burden will fall on the next generation. However, with Labor's wild spending and $Trillion debt, they will be paying for Labor's largesse as well.

A trillion dollars of debt, yes true SM, but when did ScuMo' and Friedbrain join the LABOR PARTY? Another lie from you know who!

Merry Xmas SM.

The mess that the Coalition left is overwhelming.

Where to for our six fives?
Try Lowes, they cater for tall people.

They might try this here;
IMPORTANT NOTICE!!
To save the economy, the Secretary of Homeland Security will announce next month that the Immigration and Customs Enforcement will start deporting seniors (instead of illegals) to lower Social Security and Medicare costs. A major study concluded that older people are easier to catch, offer less resistance, and—most importantly—will not remember how to get back home.

WTF?
There are many legal ways to reduce a person's tax obligations.
Apart from those already mentioned there is use of company cars, fuel cars, mobile phone and plans, tax credits on share dividends, family trusts and many more.

Even dog food and registration can be tax deductible for protection of tools and equipment.

This is the system as it is set up and nobody should be shamed for using it within the law.

Use of the cash economy and other fraudulent activities such as washing cash through poker machines to illegally avoid paying tax is simply that - fraud.

I actually hope that younger working people get fed up with the current tax system (and as a result the way benefits are distributed) and lobby for change.

"Try Lowes, they cater for tall people" and old blokes as well. Issy, don't tell me you haven't got a wardrobe full of cheap 'Made in China' Hawaiian shirts from Lowes. I bet you've got a bright red one with 'Surfing Santa's' on it just for the festive season. AND a bright yellow one with 'Pineapples' to wear on the more sombre occasions like funerals.

Treat the over 65's according to their contributions during their working life ! They'll go their own way as long as the social 'experts' leave them be !

Hi Indy,

What you fail to realise is Aged Welfare as it is now stands at over $70 billion annually is not sustainable in the long term. With an ageing population, and ever increasing demands on the budgetary dollar something will have to give. The most likely scenario would see superannuation paid as a pension, and not as a lump sum. Secondly the rather generous assets test will be tightened. Finally the big asset of many pensioners, the "family home" will lose its exemption from the means testing. Also the pensionable age of 67 in all likelihood will rise to 70 and beyond. Possible income allowable before affecting the pension may decrease. If all these measures were introduced, along with a truly 'National Superannuation' income sustainability for older Australians would be a reality.

Paul1405,
By far even less sustainable is keeping the likes of you on the public payroll ! I have a legacy that still benefits the people,, what'll yours be ?
A blank slate ?

Funny how Paul1405 is so quick off the mark for demanding replies from others !

Hi Indy,

I do not demand replies, no one here is compelled to reply. Your above post is guff, you fail on several accounts, there is no meaningful question(s) asked by you.

Claim by you; "I (Indy) have a legacy that still benefits the people, what'll yours be ? Explain your legacy, is it being years on social welfare, I can't match that.

"A blank slate ?" That doesn't make sense as a question.