The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > raising the pension age

raising the pension age

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. ...
  7. 20
  8. 21
  9. 22
  10. All
Effect on business of raising the pension age to 70

The huge amount of Australian workers who take to the roads in their camper vans and caravans for a trip around Australia, puts a huge amount of dollars into the tourism operators businesses.
They buy food, fuel, fees and spend large amounts of tourism dollars around the country.
Taking them out of the system would impact on business far more than the amount it costs to pay their pensions.
As is usual this government has made policy on the run and not thought through the consequences of their panic reaction to the budget blow-out.

The tourism industry employs 908,434 persons or 7.9% of total Australian employment (Direct 531,900 persons, Indirect 376,534 persons).

Mining, by comparison, employs 2.4% of the workforce
Posted by Robert LePage, Tuesday, 22 April 2014 1:25:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Erm, people who work still take holidays. If you're working until 70, it means you can't afford to retire, and take that holiday around the country. With people living longer...an extra 20 years compared to 50 years ago, the pension bill has risen exponentially. I suggest YOU think things through.
Posted by Dick Dastardly, Tuesday, 22 April 2014 3:49:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Erm, it would be very hard to get around Australia in a few weeks holiday aaaaannnnddd, a lot of people these days do not work full time and do not get an annual holiday.
A few days off now and then is all they take because they are frightened of losing the job they have if they are away too long.
It would probably surprise you how many there are that are on a pension and are also grey nomads.
Posted by Robert LePage, Tuesday, 22 April 2014 4:10:25 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
...The tourism industry employs 908,434 persons or 7.9% of total Australian employment (Direct 531,900 persons, Indirect 376,534 persons).

Mining, by comparison, employs 2.4% of the workforce

Robert, in order to respond, I need to know where the indirect jobs for tourism come from.

As for pensioners spending more on travel than it costs, how can this be as they certainly won't spend every cent on travel.

While I understand your point about lost tourism dollars from nomads, may I suggest raising the pension age from 67 to 70, remembering labor had already said 67, would have far less an impact on tourism than FWA IR Axe that saw many nomads who once relied on fruit picking while traveling, loose that source of income, which by the way found it's way to many a tourist operator.

Finally, when the pension was introduced, the average life expectancy for males was about 55. Now it's about 85, almost a 55% increase. Furthermore, when introduced the ratio of payee to payer was about 27 to 1, that's now more lime 2 to 1.

We now also have the single mothers, the middle class welfare recipients, the illegals, all I can say is, what's the alternative but to raise the pension age. In fact, if raising it by the percentage that life expectancy has increased, the pension should not kick in until a male hits 101.

One thing that is for certain is that the money is going to run out., so As I say Robert, what's the alternative?
Posted by rehctub, Tuesday, 22 April 2014 4:51:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Back when old-age pensions (are we still allowed to use that term?) were introduced in industrialised countries (most countries still don't have it in 2014), the average male worker lasted another two years. Nowadays, a person of sixty can expect to last until he is ninety or she is ninety five, and in twenty years, it will be another five years or so again, ninety five for men and one hundred for women - i.e., IF you last to sixty.

So even if governments kick up the pensionable age to seventy, and by some remote time like 2029, pensioners then can expect to last, not two years, but perhaps thirty years or more.

A hundred years ago, most workers were in manual labour, ploughing, hay-lumping, or in noisy and dirty and dangerous factories, or lumping 150-lb bags of wheat, 200-lb bags of cement, and for the wimps, 70-lb bags of sugar. Nowadays, far more people, men and perhaps relatively fewer women, have little heavier to lump than a mouse. Or a Soy Latte. Their joints will still be okay when they are pensioners; the walking stick industry will be extinct by then.

So do the maths: will you have just two years of pensionable leisure, or thirty ?

So stop whinging.

Joe

PS. Disclosure: Why should I care, I'm already 71.
Posted by Loudmouth, Tuesday, 22 April 2014 4:58:21 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The alternative can be more elderly on the dole. it's just another way of creating an underclass which this type of govt; is all in favor of.
Sixty seven is far enough, seventy is just ridiculous.
Posted by 579, Tuesday, 22 April 2014 4:58:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. ...
  7. 20
  8. 21
  9. 22
  10. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy