ABS figures show that income accruing to family-run and small businesses has declined from 26% in 1960 to just 9% in 2019. Our biggest employers are on the skids, squeezed out by big corporations, many of whom are not even Australian.

Australia is becoming an "oligopoly economy". Fewer jobs, too many immigrants, leading to more unemployment, pending disaster.

Compulsory superannuation has seen wealth transferred from working people to the financial services industry. Super has simultaneously increased the burden on taxpayers and reduced the lifetime earnings of workers. Compulsory superannuation has tripled the financial service's income.

Property owners are getting more money all the time, while home ownership (which used to be the average person's greatest source of wealth) is declining.

The lockdown-induced recession has smashed young people, small business owners, and the private sector while big business, the public sector, and the financial and political elites have been unaffected.

We are not in a good place.

// ttbn:"Compulsory superannuation has seen wealth transferred from working people to the financial services industry."

A worker's super is their money- they own it not the super funds! However, there are fees that pay for the funds manage it. But if they have a worthwhile fund then the return the fund makes should easily exceed the fees. So while a small proportion of the worker's money is transferred overall the worker gains.

// Super has simultaneously increased the burden on taxpayers ...
Complete rubbish! Super's whole purpose is to reduce the burden on taxpayers. It is making the worker pay for they own retirement with their own money. Theoretically not many should need a full age pension in a couple of decades when the first people who have been compulsory contributing to super their whole working life retire. Of course there's the possibility that some funds go bust due to dodgy investments or criminal behaviour by the managers (which I don't know if it has happened to any yet- it's unlikely because of the auditing that's required) or workers blow the lot when they first get it or they never spent enough time in work to accumulate much or they live very long lives, so there will still be a small minority of workers who need a pension.

-continued below-

-from above-

// ... and reduced the lifetime earnings of workers.
More lies. Superannuation is just part of a worker's pay package. Since wages are more or less determined by supply/demand (except for minimum wages) then if you take away the compulsory super component the rest of the package will increase to restore the total back to were it was. Chances are the cash received will increase but other components may increase instead, indeed the worker may choose to increase voluntarily super contributions.
But in addition, because many people (especially wage earners) are hopeless at saving/investing they will actually increase their total income over their life by way of compulsory super since the super fund invests the money for them.

I don't know why it is that some old folk on this forum just don't get super. What is it that makes it so hard for you to understand?

some old folk on this forum just don't get super.
thinkabit,
You mean like 'self-funded' retirees who paid as little Tax as possible via negative gearing & in the end have their Super beefed up by Govt subsidies to Super ?

Why do we need Super in the first place ? Why not just have the old age Pension to which everyone contributes ? The should not be any loopholes to avoid contributing to the pension. Those who travel outside Australia should have to pay their contribution up front.
Most importantly, hit negative gearing on the head once & for all !
Those who want more money in retirement should be free to pay into a Super scheme as much as they like but again, no special rebates/tax exemptions etc. Everyone contributes the same because ultimately, everyone expects to get the same full stop !

I more than anyone has riled against the 'Aged Pension' on the Forum. Why, when its supported by the vast majority of Australians, and certainly by the gravy train mob on the Forum presently receiving what is a generous taxpayer funded benefit. My opposition is based on the long term SUSTAIABILITY of the scheme at current levels, and the inequality of the payment. Firstly all pensioners are not alike, at one end are the elite, those owning their own home, and having a sustentive amount of assets, in the case of a pensioner couple owning their home that can have as much as $401K in assets, indexed yearly. At the other end are the renters and like with no assets, who just make ends meet. The indications are the payout by government has to grow exponentially from $25 billion now to around $75 billion in six years time, with unsustainable compounding growth in the years beyond. All this while Australia has to service a trillion dollar debt! Younger taxpayers are rightly concerned that they prop up these pensioner elites today, whilst its unlikely they will receive such a generous pension, if any at all, in the future.

Some of the elite pensioners want to attack superannuation. Gee they want it all!