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!

individual,

Why indeed. There are many critics among people who know what they are talking about who have been questioning the sense of compulsory superannuation right from the beginning. They are still questioning it.

I've been retired for over 20 years, and have little interest in it these days. My only comment on it was how workers are enriching the elites with it. But as always, the average drone doesn't seem interested in the fact that they are getting poorer while the rich are getting richer off their (the drones') backs; they are so used to relying on remote politicians and bureaucrats leading them by the noses that they are incapable of thinking for themselves. Modern civilisation is not that much different now from ancient Roman civilisation - bread and circuses provided by the Caesars to keep the plebs, ignorant and complacent and under control.

The lethargy of the mob will see things getting much worse from January next year when the Great Reset gets started in Lucerne. Our own PM, a great one for pretending to be sincere about Australian independence, is already looking like changing his tune on global domination.

individual asks, "Why do we need Super in the first place ?"

Well Paul1405 above has covered the fiscal reality of it quite well. But there is also more to the political/moral dimension of this question. Now since this is the political/moral aspect I acknowledge that it purely a subjective view-point based opinion. And that for some, in their opinion, the pension is the better solution to the problem of funding retirement than superannuation. But for me, I prefer superannuation over the pension.

For I believe that one of the most central tenets to being a responsible citizen is that you take care of yourself and your dependents. While a good government is one that imposes limited demands on its citizens. So the best solution would for there to be neither superannuation nor pensions because we all lived by these ground rules and thus each voluntarily saved for our own retirement. This would leave the government to need only assist those that fail to save enough due to exceptional circumstances (such as someone who is incapacitated due to injury or someone who looses their savings due to criminal behaviour by others). But, I admit that in reality this is simply not going to work because a sizeable portion of the population are absolutely hopeless at planning ahead for the future let alone looking after themselves in the present. You only have to read about the billions spent on illicit drugs each year to appreciate how incapable some are at spending wisely.

-- continued below --

-- from above --

So since my preferred option is not really practical the second best option, available to date, is compulsory super. But thsi does come at a cost to some. For instance it has cost me personally. This is because when young and first working I used to save and invest aggressively. I saved considerably more over and above just the obligatory super. My investmenst in the main paid better than the returns I received on my super (due to the factors like super funds having red tape overheads and being required to be quite staid and boring in their investments). So effectively I lost potential wealth by being forced to invest in super instead of being allowed to invest the money myself.

Thinkabit.

Well spoken from somebody who has ridden on the sheep’s back.
But yours is not a typical story.

The atypical story is, most retirees now, are the cohort of workers who entered a manufacturing based economy in the cities, or rural based economies in the regions, at an early age; mostly at age fifteen , which was the minimum school leaving age.

Unemployment was around three percent, and everybody who could work did work.
This was a situation where the PAYE tax rate was over thirty percent; a high taxing economy sustained Government spending without debt burdens now through the roof.

What happened then? things were fine before Keating and Hawke took to meddling with the leavers.
under their watch, our manufacturing base was gifted to China, and other cheap labour Asian countries. As a consequence, unemployment rose, jobs became insecure and the populace less wealthy.

The immigration levers were set to wide open, which did two things.
One was to overstimulate the housing market, making the choice of home ownership less achievable for most, and a “loser system” emerged, where the ever increasing homeless are plundered for profit by wealthy property investors.

Worse, the profiteers are further enabled in their plunder by Government subsidies, in the form of special tax breaks.

So now we have a clear winners and losers society. The wealthy class of investors, pandered to by fawning Government subsidies, and the losing classes, comprising the younger and endlessly educated, with higher expectations because of it.

So the above is the society we view, with limited ability and scarce resources, to actually think long term about superannuation and investment.
Those that manage to achieve homeownership as an investment, are lured into debt traps and reside in those suburbs where home values are generally stagnant.

Their situation is tenuous, as evinced by the “too many” who took the opportunity to cash in on their super accounts during the current COVID crises.

You need to catch up.

Dan.

The treasurer is responsible for the safety of the money received by the club and for obtaining maximum benefit from any deposit or investment.

A treasurer, as a custodian for the resources of the club/group, should also budget carefully to ensure there is always sufficient cash at the bank to cover cheques and expenses paid by bank transfer.

It is highly recommended that the club, led by the treasurer, establish a computer-based bookkeeping process utilizing appropriate security software and systems. Along with this, an online registration process, including the payment of fees due should be established. The treasurer’s 10 commandments
Maintain secure computer-based accounts and banking systems. Record receipts and payments clearly and accurately.
Issue receipts for all monies received
Promptly bank all monies received
Seek out the safest and most productive place to bank the organization’s cash
Do not pay out any money without the authority of the committee
Do not issue petty cash without receiving a voucher
Clearly distinguish between capital, revenue, and expenditure
Make sure the balance shown on the bank statements can be reconciled to the balance in the cashbook
Report the past, present, and future financial progress and position of the club to all committee meetings and the AGM
Faithfully discharge your responsibilities to the committee of the club, its members, its sponsors, and others with whom it does business

There are Retirees & then there are pensioners, I think we all know who is costing the Taxpayers more !

You need to catch up.
diver dan,
They never will because if they could they would have by now ! I mean, what can we possibly expect from people who didn't leave school until their 20's & then got into the Public Service not knowing what they're supposed to be doing for their salaries & taxpayer subsidised Super ?