Cont/...

However, the ageing community is being asked to become more self reliant to offset growthist policy. Yet both sides of government are determined to exacerbate the problem of an ageing population by ensuring the problem grows with each successive generation.

Our retirement system is beginning to stink. What possessed Labor and Liberal governments to entrust the private sector with retirement income. Instead of talking about tax levies for maternity leave and the like what about a tax levy for pensions and like diver dan suggested a pension account that follows you rather than the dog's dinner of superannuation.

My father is self-funded and receives a small pension as well. He often laments the system that sees his private pension increase but only to the detriment of others who see high interest rates imposing further burdens on the mortgage belt. Housing unaffordability (rents and ownership) is very much tied in with these retirement, investment and superannuation policies.

There has to be a better way but is a whole-system problem and it is not only one sector that needs an overhaul.

sonofgloin>>Rehctub, this is not a comment on the super contribution, but housing prices have risen by 1000% in 20 years and the flow on costs in rents have risen accordingly.

Sorry to correct you, but this is not true with regards to the 'flow on' effects you have mentioned.

I bought my first house 20 years ago, it was worth $38K and rented for $80 per week. 11% return on investment.

Today that same house, still standing rents for $320 per week, yet is worth $350K. Less than 5% return.

Which ever way you look at it, rents are cheaper today than they were 20 years ago, relatively speaking.

pelican, read my post. I am not suggesting that wages be cut, rather, I am suggesting that the burdon should nbot be again forced on business owners.

>>You really take the cake sometimes. Most low income earners do not have vast savings to p*ss away and your assumption that low income earners are all is not only grossly wrong but an unfair assumption

Once again, you have miss the point of my post. I do not regard all low income earners as 'wastefull vagabonds and layabouts , however, I challenge you to go to the local pub, any afternoon and count the 'well to do' people there drinking, smoking and gabling. Sorry, they are either at work, or attending to more important issues, like family.

>>There would be more sympathy for some of your views if your anger was not directed to the poor but at governments for poor policy.

Read my lips. I have said many times that governments should assist the low income earners, not the employers through unjustified wage increases.

>>diver dan, I to have long held the belief that one's pension should be calculated by the amount one has contributed to the public purse.

Trouble is, thanks to our 'tall poppy' attitudes, our system is the exact opposite.

This was my reply to diver dan. Did you miss that!

The tall poppy syndrome in Australia is the stuff of urban myth. There is more cutting down of the lower poppies if OLO is indicative of wider opinion.

We have created a system where service and quality are things of the past. One day we might wake up and smell the roses (speaking of flowers).

You continue to ignore the impact of greed at the big end of town and how this has a snowball effect on the quality of life for everyone.

You want to talk about handouts by government look no further than corporate Australia. Individual wealth should not come at a cost to other community values. The system that allows it is no longer one that supports workers.

I think you need a dose of John Lennon's Working Class Hero:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njG7p6CSbCU

Part of the lyrics:

"...When they've tortured and scared you for twenty odd years,
Then they expect you to pick a career,
When you can't really function you're so full of fear,
A working class hero is something to be,
A working class hero is something to be.
Keep you doped with religion and sex and TV,
And you think you're so clever and classless and free,
But you're still fu*ing peasents as far as I can see,
A working class hero is something to be,
A working class hero is something to be.
There's room at the top they are telling you still,
But first you must learn how to smile as you kill,
If you want to be like the folks on the hill,
A working class hero is something to be.
A working class hero is something to be.
If you want to be a hero well just follow me,
If you want to be a hero well just follow me."

Pelican, people themselves are the reason (in most cases) why they are doing it tough.

Firstly, they wish to be able to earn a decent income, without decent skills and only by working a 9 to 5 job.

This didn't happen 30 years ago.

Go back thirty years and a council job was one that you took, but only if you had no other choice.

The pay was low.

There were no 'bob cats', no 'escavators', in fact, most then worked very hard for very little.

Nowadays, these jobs are seen as 'set for life'. They receive a decent wage for very little effort (in most cases) and, most importantly, they know THEY CAN'T BE SACKED! Thanks to UFD laws.

As I often say, you can have whatever you want, you just have to work for it.

Trouble is, many people today want what others have, but want someone else to pay for it.

Now, to your tall poppy synd.

Now firstly, high income earners that you appear to dispise, not only have their own families to raise, but they also provide assistance for low income earners families.

Now many have no problem with this, other than the fact that thay are left out to dry after they have completed their working lives.

Do you honestly think that a system is fair when one works hard all their life, pays huge amounts in taxes and then gets zero support for their efforts, while, at the same time, one who chooses to either not work hard, or, blow their money so they end up with very little get a full pension?

Now if you honestly believe this is a fair system, then may I suggest you are a 'tall poppy'.

At the end of the day I am simply trying to warn that a pay rise now is not a good idea, esspecially when the majority of jobs created today are by default, not sound economic management as our madam PM would like us to think.

Imagine how bad our our building industry would be if not for the natural disasters.

rehctub
Where have I said I despise high income earners? Twisting my words does not make your general argument any more sound.

What I dislike is the constant negative symbolism about people on low incomes - at the pub drinking or gambling. We all know there are people in the world that are bums, but you are making generalised comments about low income workers as though this was the norm and the implication that any disadvantage is all "their" fault.

What I also dislike is the emphasis you give to the "greed" of lower income earners while failing to address the existence of greed and corruption at the other end. That does not imply all those at the big end of town are corrupt, only that much of the pressures in the economy are not due to working class wage rises. Are you arguing that low income earners not be able to keep up with the costs of living.

We are not living in the Third World and it is inherent to good democracy that low income workers earn a living wage. I would hate to see Australia follow in America's footsteps - retail and other low earners barely subsist in a culture that pushes money making at the expense of fair treatment of workers and exploitation of people.

The very people they despise as being "their" fault for not aspiring to greater things are the very people these businesses rely. Why do you think Australia has difficulty in recruiting lower paid positions? The lack of respect you hold for low wage earners is what I continue to rally against.

Business are formed to make profits and those profits can only be made with a good labour force. Why should not labour share in the spoils of that profit they helped earn by a fair and honest wage? For my two cents worth the best managers are those who recognise the efforts of their staff and are not governed by the them 'n us mentality.

Pelican, the cold hard facts are that minimum wages are simply to high. If they want a 'decent wage' as you suggest, that's fine. Either obtain the skills or work longer hours, you can't have low skills and a decent income, it just doesn't work.

And remember, many low income earners get 'welfare' that high income earners don't. Do you think that's fair? Essecially when the high income earners are the ones who have paid the high taxes, yet get nothing back.

In any case the proof is there as the jobs are still being created, only, they are being created 'off shore' and that's simply because we have out priced ourselves.

Plus, unfair dismisal laws (protection of the lazy worker in many cases) have had a huge bearing on these changes.

In fact, the majority of low paid jobs are now mostly in industries that can't be outsources, dosn't this tell you something.

We need a system like America. Wait staff there either become very good at their jobs and get well rewarded with tips, or they fail.

The alternative is to become well skilled. Many do, many don't.

As I have said before, we are all entitled to fail. It's up to the individual.

I struggled through school but simply did not want to be poor.

Unfortunately, todays less than bright kids don't have the options I had in the 70's as our manufacturing jobs have gone.