If the pension age is to be 70 then the first ones to voluntarily raise their own pension age to 70 ought to be the politicians, until they do that then all their rhetoric and posturing is but hypocrisy.

Lead by example.

Are you all aware they are talking about raising it in the year 2058, which means, of you were born prior to 1965 you won't be effected, although I'm not sure about labor's plan for 67.

Now I started work in 77, so anyone who was born in 1966 should have started work in 83, earned super from 93, so should have a super nest egg to supplement the pension. At this stage they can draw upon that at 60.

The plain simple fact is, that if we commence worker latter in life, live for 60 odd percent longer, and still expect the pension at aged 65, then that is plain greedy.

We must get away from the thought of, what's best for me, and think of what's best for my country. Tony Abbott is saying that, and I have said that for a decade.

What's TOTALLY forgotten in the debate is just because the pension age has been raised to eventually be 70, does *NOT* mean the pension age will be 70.

Why?

Well, in 10 years times a future government will say "we just can't afford to pay pensions at 70 years old, we'll need to increase it". But 10 years after that there will be a bit of a recession so a future government will say, "it must be at 80 years, otherwise we'll go broke" (and after fiddling the books they'll get re elected by a scared and gullible population). Then just 5 years after that the pollies will announce that the average life expectancy is now 95, and that those future pensioner bludgers will then have to to 94 years of age before getting the pension. But they'll be lucky, after all they get to enjoy their pension from 94 till they die at about 95 or 96 years old. How privileged they will be.

Anyone who thinks that the pension age will be stuck at just 70 is a VERY gullible person indeed. Increased age limits are guaranteed to happen.

and politicians to only get the ordinary pension upon reaching 70 (or whatever) and to be on the same super scheme as everyone else.

Personally, I would hold more concerns for ones 'super' as opposed to the old age pension, as for one, it will be multiple trillion by 2058, and two, it's not governments money, it's just a nest egg I doubt they will be able to resist.