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).