With Australia's rapidly ageing population. According to the Governments AIHW there were 3.8 million Australians aged 65 and over in 2017, 15% of the population. It is projected that by 2057 this figure will increase to 8.8 million, or 22% of the population. Aged Pensions are expected to cost the taxpayer $50 billion in 2018/19. Under the present conditions this figure is expected to balloon to $72 billion by 2025/26. At the same time Carer Payments will blowout from $7 billion in 2014/15, to $18 billion by 2025/26.

Aged pensioners also enjoy heavenly subsidised fringe benefits in health, transport, state and federal subsidises for rent, power, water and council rates and other government charges. Would it be a prudent budgetary measure if the overall Aged Pension benefit was pegged at $50 billion, with a similar cap on carer and nursing home expenditure. A tightening of the over generous assets and incomes tests would also be welcomed by some, as would be a change in the age requirements.

Some believe the Aged Pension should be nothing more than a safety net, keeping it at existing levels, or lowering it if the budget requires prudent fiscal management. Some want limited allowances for assets and income, and certainly no overly generous fringe benefit subsidises. The age requirement could be progressively lifted to accommodate the growing elderly population, keeping it at 15% of the total. With superannuation and older work capabilities, is this a possibility?

Hi Paul,

I certainly don't begrudge people my age the pension but, as physical work becomes less common, many more people will go their entire working lives without raising a sweat, and reach their senior years in comparatively good condition and expecting to live ten or twenty years longer than their parents did.

So it's inevitable that governments of all persuasions will slowly move the pension age up, maybe one year every decade. I expect my kids not to be eligible until they're seventy, and maybe by 2100, the pension age il be up around seventy five.

Of course, pretty soon, most workers will be retiring with the full benefits of forty five or fifty years of compulsory super, so they will be cushioned from having to rely on the pension. And of course, as work becomes less physical, many older people will be happy to work a bit longer and kick up their super benefits when they do eventually retire.

So maybe their situation will not be so dire after all.

Cheers,

Joe

Dear Paul,

Here's a link that explains why cutting Australia's
migrant intake would do more harm than good,
at least for the next decade:

http://theconversation.com/why-cutting-australias-migrant-intake-would-do-more-harm-than-good-at-least-for-the-next-decade-108748

For once I can, as a pensioner, agree with you completely Paul. The age pension is unsustainable, & will have to be reduced at some time in the near future.

However at the same time the rest of the welfare state must be similarly cut. First to go must be "Gillard's Revenge", the NDIS & Gonski. They must go completely.

Secondly tertiary education must become full cost recovery. Bright kids must continue to be able to get the education they need/want, but only through recoverable interest free student loans. Universities must of course be cut by half or more, with subjects like nursing being put back to an in hospital apprentiship style.

School education must have it's feather bed removed, as must all incompetent teachers. Teachers did a better job when they had 40 in their classes, & we should increase classes to this at least. Teachers who can't handle this should be gone. Teachers may need a reintroduction of the cane to handle difficult kids. Kids who don't get adequate passes must not be allowed into senior high school.

Public housing must be done away with. If we expect pensioners to cater to their own needs, so should younger folk. No one should be advantaged with cheep housing, paid for by others.

The dole seems about right, but must start reducing after 6 months, & come down to zero after about 18 months.

Bureaucracies must be cut by at least half, & wages set to match responsibilities. Thus Tasmanian bureaucrats should receive about a third of NSW & Victorians pay rates. Perhaps their pay rats should reflect their results. South Australians should be required to pay the public for their catastrophes. All quangos must go.

Public transport should be eliminated, or at least become full cost recovery, after paying a suitable return to motorists for using the roads.

So that is a start Paul, & I'm sure you will agree that it has a lot further to go, if we are to reduce the cost of the aged on the public purse in an equitable manner.

"Some believe the Aged Pension should be nothing more than a safety net .... ".

It is a safety net! People living solely on the Age Pension are not exactly luxuriating on clover.

I suspect that as the population ages so will the number of aged voters (not rocket science). Politically it will not be beneficial to upset a large group of voters. Hasbeen is right that we spend far to much on health and education. These are sacred cows and bad value at the end of the day. The warmist thieves have also raised the cost of electricity many times over. The more we have spent on education the dumber the population has become. The Marxist who have idolised Venezuela for so long are still putrifying the minds of the dumb at universities. Its hard to see it all ending well although no wonder could possibly of believed how good Trump has been for America. More jobs, lower taxes and ditching the Paris agreement that the leaches rely on. Interesting times.

If the Govt believes Pensioners should merely exist then the pension is ok however, if being a pensioner should be a lifestyle that rewards 50+ years of work & paying taxes then too much of the pension is taken back by Govt.

Paul very long ago we did fund pensions out of our taxes
In my view we should put aside half our super to fund a pension
Current campaign against changes to franking credits should remind us some will never agree
Welfare reform must look at the issue

Belly,
As far as I'm aware we've never stopped paying the 7.5% pension contribution, Govt (I don't know which one) has stopped recording it as such & it was absorbed out of sight & out of mind most likely to the Public Service Super Fund.
I am with you on paying towards a pension rather than concentrate so much on a Super Fund because ultimately, we're living more & more off Super anyway. What's the point of Super apart from it being simply another excuse to cut the pension ? Super should be a nest egg rewarding the pensioner for having the discipline not to squander their money. it should not & must not be an excuse for Govt to cut the pension. Most wage earners, unlike salary earners, do not have negative gearing & other such commercial welfare. They rely on a pension & seeing that they paid for it all their life they should receive it.
In general, I think the pension is adequate but because of the asset test it becomes inadequate.
I think it's immoral for a Govt to deem, for example a boat a bloke build with his own hands & has paid GST on the materials he should then be penalised for having an asset that doesn't make him any money. By all means hit the next owner with a sales tax etc but do not penalise the original owner/builder.

indy for me super was one of the best things my party ever did
While mine has just about gone now it bought me my home
I am the only one in my family to own one, lower income group that we had been
BUT super makes some very well off in retirement others suffering
Welfare is about the latter
If 50 percent of super went in to such as the future fund, to pay a living pension, and the other have was a lump sum?
I was far in to my working life when the scheme started, others will get a million, even more, welfare must remain for the true needy not the greedy
By the way I contributed ,well above the then percentage, often going without to build my super others, if they understand we all get old could do the same

Belly,
I'm in total parallel with you on that one ! My gripes is with the old age pension assets test of which Scott Morrison was the architect. A property/belonging should not be an asset until the moment it actually makes money! Saying that, a property/asset should also not be allowed to be built up/accumulated via negative gearing. These should attract tax only when changing ownership even when no profit is made by the original owner.
And yes, Super was Labor's best policy ever . If only they could develop another policy that helps build this Nation !

Labs,

I have a dark secret to reveal!. I have a younger son, aged 32 and he votes LIBERAL! Belly the shame of it, where did I go wrong. LOL. He is the one who inspired me to start this thread. The kids really down on the Aged Pension payment. Turning 65.5 I made a claim for the aged pension, he was dirty on me, plus the wife, even making a claim, "Dad, with all your assets, home, property, cash, and you expect ME to pay you and Mum about $1400 a fortnight, you got to be kidding!"

Indy, Centrelink are not as easy to deal with as you might think. I must be getting that 5% up claim are doing their job. I have spoken, phone, office in writing, to a dozen different Public Servants and they ain't giving me much joy.

But I do see my sons point, you can be reasonably well off and benefit from the Aged Pension. Gee, the kid wants that 'payment card' idea extended to all pensioners, no booze, no pokies, just bread and margarine (its cheaper than butter).

Paul,

Huh ! Margarine ! Some of us can only dream of margarine, we have to make do with sump oil that we scrape off the road.

Joe

Paul1405,
Where did I ever state Centrelink are easy to deal with ? I think they're actually a hairs' breadth's over the borderline to criminal.
Those young people who think they shouldn't be contributing to the old age pension should think of their own pension instead of relying on their contemporaries to fork out for them when the time comes.
Don't they realise that we too have contributed to the pensions of those before us ? This is the problem with the progressives' mentality, they fail to see logic. Everything is so clinical. No room for error except their errors of course. If they're exempt from contributing to the common pension fund then will they accept to be exempt from inheritance ? I bet no ! they can always sell your assets when they inherit them & they can then pay asset tax.
Contributing to a common pension fund must be viewed like an insurance. You may need it or you may not. It's part of economic stimulation from which they profit too.
Ask him to reply to me.

At the coming election don’t forget it was Morrison as treasurer and Turnbull who did the dirty on pensioners most recently. Drain the swamp and write 'None Of These' on the lower house paper, and vote Australian Conservatives in the senate – or, put up with more of the same old thing for another three years. Our political class, irrespective of the party or dogma they represent, are responsible for all our problems; it is stupid to think they can fix what they caused.

The Australian Conservatives appear the most sensible option at this time. Let's see how their rhetoric changes as we close in on the election.
If LNP/ALP don't address the inequality re salaries & wages BEFORE the election them I'm afraid they'll lose a lot of support. The first ting they need to do is cement in the goal posts so they can't be shifted anymore.
AC are openly proposing to put a stop to the perks of ex-politicians. What will LNP/ALP propose ?
All parties must combine in laying the foundation stone for a very near future National Service.
Why ? Because it is imperative that the me, me & me mentality is kicked in the butt.
Public infrastructure projects proposals/plans must be made public now ! The voters need to have more to cast their vote on than just party loyalty !
Is the Aged pension sustainable ? Of course it is & more than that, it'll stimulate the economy way more than all negative gearing combined !

Indy,

I spoke with my younger son, I read your post to him. He said "Do I have to respond to one of your anonymous and annoying Commie Labor mates!"

His points
* He does not expect to ever receive an aged pension.
* Income tax is too high.
* He pays superannuation.
* Thinks aged pension should only be paid to the poor, too many collecting who have money and assets.
* Wants that card business extended to all pensioners. Got the idea too many "old farts" are down at 'Gods Waiting Room' boozing, and playing pokies with the pension money, his tax money.

I told him BTW "Comrade Individual is not a Communists, he is only the Secretary of our local Politburo!, that's all". He said "I've read your online forum BS, and you're all wacko's!

Paul1405,
Cheers for that. Yep, he sounds like the average young bloke with a head full if idealistic views (same as my bloke) who has a school teacher for a mother (say no more).
I don't think there's any way to ever get past a pension. A mate of mine recently said that we should all be fitted with a chip at birth which has an ABN. We could just go through a life of negative gearing. Yeah, right !
I maintain that Super should not be compulsory but Pension should. It would give those who exercised control more satisfaction at retirement instead of being pi$$ed off at no-hopers getting more from Centrelink than those who worked & saved.
Those who exploit negative gearing throughout their working life should not be entitled to a pension. They can have their Super if they so decide. Personally, I'd like to see NG a thing of the past & Pension a thing of the future. Economically it'd be a real winner for all Of Australia.

The Super Scheme was put there to eventually replace the Pension. It has a long way to go before those people who didn't have a Super when they started their Working life are no longer with us. (I'm in that lot)

The problem with Super is all the hanger-on-ers taking the guts out of it. When it comes time to live on the Super the people who were on lower Wages all their working life or have never worked will receive bugger all.

Obviously Paul, as you have not responded to my list of other tax payer costs that must be cut at the same time as any age pension reduction to give an equitable result, you must agree.

However you have not added to my list of exorbitant expenses that should be addressed simultaneously. Surely you must have a few other things that are an excessive drain on taxpayers, or is it only just the pension you think is excessive?

From my observations the pension is both excessive & not enough. It is excessive for those who hardly contributed & inadequate for those who did.
Super is heavily subsidised for public servants & blue collar workers can ill afford to contribute adequately.
We need to get away from Super replacing the pension, it doesn't & won't work any better in future.
Super should be a voluntary nest egg, the pension should be for everyone retiring. Super should not be in the hands of companies. We pay tax to Govt so Govt should manage the pension & Super. We have a zillion public servants twiddling thumbs, they can manage these funds. Abolish old age pension asset testing & replace it with inheritance & or transaction tax.
It's time blue collar workers are allowed a life after work & circulate their money!

Australia would be in a much healthier state to support the pension if we had not aborted 3,000,000 healthy potential young workers over the last 30 years. Instead we have imported over the last 30 years middle aged persons, now coming on to the pension.

The Australian population in increasing in age the Australian population has increased by 3 years over the last two decades, from 34 years at 30 June 1997 to 37 years at 30 June 2017. The pension is adequate if you are not paying rent.

Josephus,
The lack of a National Service is also a factor. Thousands of young people go tripping around the world for long periods during which they do not contribute to either future pension or Super.
But when the time comes they'll be complaining bitterly that the pension isn't enough.
It's high time they get a dose of responsibility.

individual,
Were national service reintroduced, the number of young people tripping around the world for long periods and not contributing to super would rise into the millions!
(OK, perhaps that's an exaggeration, but it would greatly increase as there would be a much more tangible advantage in making yourself scarce).

You whinge about the younger generations' apparent selfishness, without realising that this is far worse in the older generations. For proof, look at Hasbeen: he wants to deny the disabled a fair go because he thinks the NDIS is too expensive. And that's just the start - with cuts to education and services, we'd soon be a third world country if he had his way!

As for the age pension, I think eligibility for it should be based not only on age, but also on years spent working in Australia. As for the amount, there is a case for having it rise more slowly than income, and whether I'd support it depends on what other changes are made in subsidies and the tax system. But I'd strongly oppose a cap or peg of the cumulative amount.

Ultimately Australia's a rich country. The age pension is sustainable if we choose to sustain it.

One problem we are facing is life expectancy, which in Australia has increased from 72 years in 1960 to 83 in 2019. The pension age has only increased slightly from 65 to 67 (1st July 2023), giving a much longer retirement period. It might be seen as controversial to suggest government sponsored euthanasia as a 72nd birthday gift for all aged pensioners. It was a dream (thanks to Gough) once that the Aged Pension should be increased to 25% of the average male income, and that was the policy of successive governments until Rudd, who under a new formula seen the pension grow beyond 25%, its now held at 27.7% of MTAWE. Another problem is with the single aged pension being arbitrarily set at 66.3% of the combined "married" rate, this in itself has lead to fiddling by some.

The fringe benefits for aged pensioners are not unsubstantial, PBS at $6.50 max, $40.30 for everyone else, the safety net is also far more generous for pensioners. There are many more generous concessions given to pensioners, council rates, car rego etc etc, even 10% off (seniors card) dinner down at the RSL. Then there is the earning capacity of pensioners which is $172 single/$304 couple without any reduction in pension payment. then its only a reduction of $1 in every $2 earned. Allowable assets and still receive a full pension.

Non home owner $465,500 single / $594,500 (couple)
Home owner $258,500 / $387,500

The assets other than cash at bank are very iffy, personal assets, value, car and furniture etc, what you say it. Property, a "valuation" on company letterhead from a friendly real estate agent will do.

Aged pensioners have also benefited from what I call the 'Lovable Granny Factor', there are more grandmas alive than grandpas. Which politician wants to kick lovable old ladies?

Indy, BTW, you can join the Greens at a pensioner concessional rate. Is the full fee, whats been holding you back?

The age pension is sustainable if we choose to sustain it.
Aidan,
Those who'd make themselves scarce would not escape responsibility as they do presently, unless they stay away from Australia permanently so, not an argument full stop.
The Age Pension is more than sustainable, it'd be an economic boost not seen for years.
What is it that makes people believe once the pension is paid it is somehow "lost' to the Govt ?
On average, 95% of a pension is spent, get it ! SPENT ! In simpler terms it is going into the local economy so it is not wasted or lost !
Imagine how many young peoples' lives would not head onto the wrong track if they had the benefit of a National Service ? Much of the very poor mentality of older people now is due to not having had National Service ! National Service & Old Age Pension are the best weapon against greed & uselessness ! National Service & Old Age Pension are the single best policy for our future !

What would be really interesting is to calculate how much bloody tax has been forgone fattening the superannuation accounts of so many people who are on a very good wicket. I suspect it would be substantial.

Every Australian should be entitled to a pension dependent on how much their superannuation and other income supplements their retirement. That is what progressive caring nations do. I don't think the value of someones home should be a factor as many older farmers in our area are asset rich but cash poor.

However all those billions of dollars in foregone tax fattening accounts should have meant we have a sustainable pension scheme looking after Australians in their retirements, afterall that is what it was designed to do. If not why on earth did we introduce it? Just to make the wealthy more wealthy?

Homes and farms are not means tested as far as the Aged Pension is concerned, give or take a few million.
There is Grandma, living alone in that 5 bedroom, non means tested, house on a 1/3 acre block. Taking in boarders is an option.

Still dodging my post about all the other government spending excesses Paul.

Incidentally, farms are taken into account as an asset If they are productive the income is taxed & applied.

For pension purposes any land even around the family home above 2.5 acres is counted as an asset, unless it has been owned by the same person for 25 years or more.

Do try to get your facts right in these rants in future.

Indie: On average, 95% of a pension is spent, get it ! SPENT ! In simpler terms it is going into the local economy so it is not wasted or lost !

It gets spent alright or gobbled up. Every time the Pensioners get a rise everything they have to pay increases. Rates & Utilities, Insurances, Car, House & Contents, Petrol, Food, Electricity, Travel & a myriad of other minor things. If Pensioners get a $3 rise they end up $1 behind again.

That is what progressive caring nations do.
Steele Redux,
Progressives aren't actually progressive. They borrow money to lend money & just you wait a few more months when the crap hits that fan. China is already slowing down dramatically.
They all followed the japan model of producing cheap but as their living standards go up they too became uncompetitive, Korea followed, then China & now we already see a rise in manufacturing in Thailand & Taiwan.
I've heard that the Amazon shares are at $220 at the moment but if Amazon were to have to pay out their shareholders, the best they could offer is $25. Major Airlines don't actually own planes, they're all leased.
The way things go we might even start manufacturing here again soon.

Dear Paul1405,

Tell your son you went through your life paying for the pensions of those who had retired without complaining about it. It was just something we did as a nation, same as creating a universal health system. His generation seems to be the first who are really whinging about it and for patently selfish reasons too.

I actually hear the same arguments about Medicare, that it should be there only for the less fortunate and that everyone who can afford it should be on private health arrangements.

What is really going on is that the coalition types like your son who want to do away with what earlier generations have built for this country, who in truth despise the values of egalitarianism, who rail against the mix of capitalism and socialism that we currently have. The motives are base and selfish and if successful will have us fall into the type of hypercapitalism which afflicts the US causing that country to incarcerate more of its citizens than any other nation in the world in order to maintain the inequities of its system.

the coalition types like your son
Steele Redux,
Surely you meant the progressive types ?

Hi Steele,

Being an economic conservative, my son thinks all welfare is crap. The line he pushes on aged pensions, is more or less, bad luck if you didn't succeed in life to retire of your own means. Then there is the argument, he pays tax for pensions today, and pays superannuation as well, there wont be any pension tomorrow for him.

there wont be any pension tomorrow for him.
Paul1405,
He is right on that one IF present & next term Govt don't pull their socks up. I can not state it often enough that LNP/ALP must be kept in line by Independents so in the upcoming election do not vote for the two majors.
We can no longer let the majority be held at ransom by a handful of incompetent self-serving bureaudroids. By majority I mean the staunch LNP/ALP supporters who are being hoodwinked by their manipulating party Lords.
We should press very hard leading up to the election on their policies on Pension, asset testing, Law & Order (Drug abuse & theft), public infrastructure & employment etc. We need to know their policies BEFORE we vote !
Also review the Tax Commissioner's & Centrelink CEO salaries because half a million plus is just too much !

Dear Paul1405,

I am curious as to why is he saying he will not get a pension?

Steele, this came about because we made a claim for the Aged Pension. The older son, Labor voter, was okay "Go for it Dad, you two have worked all you lives, why not, if you get it, good luck!".

Younger Son Liberal voter was shocked, he thinks;

One, he will be such a great asset builder himself that he'll have no need for a pension, which is for the losers or the greedy (that's me, the greedy).

Two, paying into Supa and insurance, has his own business, doing well at 32, is paying off some good assets. Forgets how much his mother and I put in to help him more than once with the business. Must have been a "Socialist" in those days when the cash was coming interest free, a repay when you can loan(s). Truthfully out of $50k he has repaid all of it back except for $10k. I told him to keep it as a gift, and he's taken me at my word.

Three, the age will go up and up, and the government will cut cut cut, and cut him off.

He said its obvious what's going to happen. well its not to me, but in his minds eye its all there.

BTW He now thinks that bloke calling himself Individual is a communist, and he's always known his father is a communist, this pension claim just confirms it.

'Ave a dekko at this,
http://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/02/retirees-in-these-countries-receive-100-of-a-working-salary/

Makes interesting reading.

Btw, many older persons today have no super because in their youth and middle working years
the only super available was non transferable, leave the job and leave any entitlements, and then there were the employers who, when the future super payouts started to look bad, simply shut down their business and started anew.
There were also those who hired on a twelve month basis and if you wanted to work there then after Christmas you were a new starter.

Hi Issy,

Long time no speak, have you been on a Burke and Wills?

The best thing was the introduction of compulsory superannuation.
The worse thing was to put all that cash into the hands of banks and insurgence companies. Ahhhhhhhh....AMP nightmares for the unsuspecting. Always in an industry based supa fund, best of a bad lot.

I favoured a National Superannuation Fund, a Medicare of supa.

I read your link, interesting.

It is the Old Age pension contribution that needs to be made compulsory. We pay into a pension fund & when we reach retirement age we get a Pension, full stop !
Super funds should be a voluntary boost to the pension.
Too many people do not have the means or inclination to discipline so therefore they should not be rewarded more than those who plan & save.
Contribute from your weekly pay to your own pension & a percentage to a common pension fund to help the needy. There needs to be a safety net no matter what.
If we reduce the insane bureaucrat salaries & tax high income properly & remove the perks for ex politicians there'll be more than adequate funding for an Old Age pension for everyone !

Paul,

Young people have a point, and I hope that governments over the next century slowly cut pensions, while putting the pension age up - so that by, say, 2060, one has to be 75, or even 80, to get the equivalent of half the current (2019) pension.

Of course, that means anybody born after 1980 or 1985. Given medical advances, they will still have thirty years of old age left, which they can spend - as they demanded in their youth - in growing poverty.

Or do young people have some sort of cunning plan, to deprive older people of public funds now, but expand them again when they themselves are approaching old age ? Good luck with that.

Ooooh, I love seeing people hoist on their own petard :)

Joe

Dear Paul1405,

I think this is really at the heart of it.

“Three, the age will go up and up, and the government will cut cut cut, and cut him off.”

Obligation over assumed entitlement. Pretty wide streak in those who think like your youngest. Must make for some interesting dinner table conversations.

Yes Steele,at home we did have the odd debate over politics from time to time. Now I'm in Queensland and they are in NSW, although we'll be down there next week for a catch up, and another grandchild due 25th a boy, so I'm told. Even told me the name they have in mind, no surprises

The sad part of it all is that there actually is enough money to go round, it's the distribution of it that is core problem.
Penalising effort & rewarding indolence too goes a long way towards inequality.

Dear individual,

You wrote;

"The sad part of it all is that there actually is enough money to go round, it's the distribution of it that is core problem.
Penalising effort & rewarding indolence too goes a long way towards inequality."

Lol. Okay you got me. That was a good one.

Okay you got me. That was a good one.
Steele Redux,
Unfortunately it's not about that it's about all of us now putting a stop to this rorting !
LNP/ALP have demonstrated on every occasion that they do not understand economics & sociology. Were it not for the taxpayers who provide a never-ending flow of Dollars these politicians would not be able to manage the Nation for more than a month.
All of us need to vote in such a way at the upcoming election that a third party i.e. independents, are put into a position of making whichever Govt we accountable.
Anyone hear that insult of Cormann's way of shopping ?

Indie: "The sad part of it all is that there actually is enough money to go round, it's the distribution of it that is core problem.

You are right there. $4 Billion being sent overseas as Jizya Tax (AID) every year just so some Government can spend their own money on Arms to attack the people that give them the "AID." If an end can be put to that Australia wouldn't have a problem. Pay off the Deficit.

Oh! Wait am minute. According to Accountants it's always better to be running in the "Red" to reduce your taxes. Ay.

better to be running in the "Red" to reduce your taxes.
Jayb,
That's what's so horribly wrong, we need a Flat tax ! Everyone pays the same rate , Full Stop !
No bracketing !
It's the ONLY way to create some sort of a level playing field. We would be a much better society in no time at all !

The back pocket nerve, unseen but it exists, believe me it exists
I am a pensioner, not one supported by investments shares or super
But I know pensions are not sustainable
Not forever, in fact from the left of center it is my view a future Labor government, must and will, reform welfare
Do not give me the *I paid my tax* thing, it was spent, on you, long ago
Yes pay for pensions AGAIN, take half of all super to fund a future living wage pension
Even pay an extra say one percent, to help fund it
Welfare was never a reward on top of investment income, it was to fund our old age
Without true reform we will be asked to work till we die, the economics will demand it

the economics will demand it
Belly,
If you let greed govern economics, yes ! It doesn't matter if we call it Pension or Super, we need to contribute but not let dodgy lawyers & corrupt bureaucrats anywhere near the system.
One of main factors of Super shortfalls now is that some Super funds do appear not to be toeing the line. Govt bureaucrats are letting them get away with it. Storm Financial was the first I believe & many of their victims are now a massive burden on the whole system as is the whole of the public service.
If everyone paid towards a compulsory pension then I can't see why an Old Age Pension wouldn't work. People who travel & are absent from work for extended periods should be made to cover their contributions before they travel. If people can afford & chose to contribute extra then they should have a voluntary Super but not mostly covered by employer contribution.
Employers should not be burdened with that & should therefore pay more tax than they do presently. Simple economics really ! No artificial complexity required at all !
In simple terms this is called managing & governing.A pension scheme should be independent of share markets, it should be purely Govt coffers & there's no reason why that couldn't be so !

I'm starting to think that Millenials are onto something: that pensions are perhaps not sustainable while the pensionable age is so low. I admire the Millenials' determination to bring justice to this issue, and wish them well in what will be a long struggle to bring down pensions and push up the pensionable age. It may take thirty or forty years, but they may bring it all about successfully if they keep at it.

So by 2060, given that jobs are bound to be much less physical and when life expectancy is nearing one hundred, the pension age could be pushed up to eighty, and the pension slashed to half of its current value. Today's Millenials may thus have another ten or twenty years of work beyond today's pension age, and retire with a fraction of the value of today's fortnightly pension. I hope they can achieve their objectives by that time and spend their retirement years, eighty to one hundred or even one hundred and ten, in relative poverty, but satisfied that a job worth doing is worth doing well.

Keep up the struggle, comrades !

Joe

Loudmouth,
I don't disagree with you but something tells me that by 2060 there'll be fewer rather than more oldies gobbling up the Pension.
I think Mother nature will respond accordingly to the mistreatment we dish out.

How many Forum commentators would survive on less than $470 per week?
and yes the concessions help such a $30 or $50 off a large water or energy bill.

Comments such as the aged pension is unsustainable defy logic.

What is unsustainable is an aged pension being given to people with large superannuation or sitting on properties worth in excess of $1 million dollars.
If a person lives in a property worth more than one million dollars.
The Federal Government should be able to secure any aged pension paid to the owner during their life when the eventual sale of the property or gifting of the property is made.This will ensure that the Aged pension will only go to deserving pensioners.
The federal government is spending billions of dollars on people who are on various pensions before they get to the aged pension.

NDIS is spending on wages for people working one on one with "clients".This is unsustainable not the Aged pension.

//What is unsustainable is an aged pension being given to people with large superannuation or sitting on properties worth in excess of $1 million dollars.//

Hi Brock, the property angle is a bit unfair on those living in Sydney and Melbourne, as their property values are higher than say a similar property in Brisbane or Adelaide.

It might be time to phase in a pension reduction based on the 9% compulsory supa contribution. BTW I think 9% is too low and should be pushed to 15% over time.
The savings and supa penality is a philosophical argument, a full pension for someone who piss it up against the wall all his life, but no pension for the careful saver.

The problem in NZ with a non means tested government supa payment (not called an Aged Pension) is, for a millionaire its pin money, for the battler at $NZ304/week its not enough. With low wages its unreasonable to ask many Kiwi's to contribute to a compulsory supa scheme.

// something tells me that by 2060 there'll be fewer rather than more oldies// Only the voices could tell you that Indy, there's no evidence to support it. Unless you support the euthanasia government birthday gift for everyone on their 72nd birthday. 'Soylent Green' and a bowl of strawberries as well.

birthday gift for everyone on their 72nd birthday. 'Soylent Green' and a bowl of strawberries as well.
Paul1405,
Don't be too hasty in dismissing that.
I have long said that bureaucrat salaries are over the top & all public service pays need to be reduced or taxed at a higher rate for the next ten years if we were to ever get close to a level playing field. A pay should reflect a public servant's worth not reward their career climbing connivery.
Funding to Art is a no no & foreign aid should be in the form of goods produced here.
I have also many times advocated Govt run Lotteries which have a monthly wage as a prize instead of expensive properties & cars. Imagine the living standard by freeing up jobs whilst no-one's unemployed. There's just so much that could be done if only we kept academics out of politics.