Pericles, I concede you the field, I can see we're just speaking entirely different languages. Reiterating standard economic thinking does not constitute rational debate in my book, and as for the tax question, a millionaire paying less than 5c in the dollar as adverse to a worker paying 20+ seems unfair by definition. I asked if you could explain that, and you say it's just an opinion, well, it's an opinion held by most people, try asking, so there's little point in continuing and wasting posts, I hit my limit too quickly, lol.
I may think about making a separate thread at some point to follow up on my "Ideal", perhaps then you may care to contribute and we can try to reach some degree of mutual communication, as we've failed to here.
As for your final passage about supplying examples and their application, lol, as you want to set parameters and conditions for me, but won't respond to my queries in even hypothetical terms, I can see we're wasting our time here, so lets not.

Rectum now says:

Another point of interest is that retirees seeking the pension is up by some 20% which is placing yet further strain on our failing system.

Something is **gonna give**!

and you already made out pensioners "get too much" and were able to spend up big on your "outlet" [NPI]

Three weeks ago when the first $900 filtered through, I think to the pensioners, we saw a definate increase in consumer spending

buy maybe you are a baker and this was first loaf of bread for a month?

and as OP you pointed out:

"...support for seniors with those eligible receiving around **one quarter** of the average annual income"

OK Rectum [and your CT minders], if you read my book you will see I DID do the hard yards by firstly tabulating how much Capt Smirk stole from us, and secondly I put numbers to your [ie you and Smirk's hystrionics] "something has gotta give".

The obvious conclusion that [as always] my CTs are not theory but fact, can be seen from a comparison ie we can't afford a few billion for aged pension with Smirk took $65 billion FROM "that we could not afford" and put it in HIS Future Fund.

So why is the FF for Unfunded Super so big?

Well we are talking here to what used to be called "Fat Cats", finally retiring after putting in a lousy 14% contrib. They get 5/8 of retirement income and generally that would be about twice the average, so that is 5 TIMES the rate the aged pensioner gets

So Rectum et al, is it not the case that something has to give because of this greed from folks who never funded their super and not the aged pensioner

Divorce Doctor, you may well hate the world, but please don't grind your axe with me. From your name it would appear that you are one of the many who stuffed your life and hold others accountable. On the contory, I enjoy my life, but it does take a lot of hard work, esspecially being maried to the same lovely lady for 24 years.

With regards to pensioners, I must state AGAIN that I have the upmost respect for them. Although there are more of them drawing on the system due to the financial crisis, I do not blame them at all. In fact, I recon it stinks when one pays taxes all thier life then misses out because they were either hard workers, smart with thier money, or both.

The system is at breaking point because there are to many drawing on it and not enough contributing to it.

My fear going forward is that the GST will have to be raised which will put even more strain on the 'genuine needy'.

I don't like to support loosers, never have, never will! In my view they should exist on welfare and nothing else. Thier kids are the inocent vicims in all this as they often miss out. Stop the cash I say!

Oh dear, must have hit another nerve hey! Never mind DD perhaps you can think of another way to alter my name, it appears to be an obsession of yours hey.