About every five years The Treasury produces a report looking well into the future of Australia. These reports project outlooks for the economy and the Australian Government’s budget over the next 40 years. They examine the long-term sustainability of current policies and how demographic, technological and other structural trends may affect the economy and the budget. The 2021 report was handed down earlier this week. The link to the report is provided below.

There are three key findings that are of great interest;

1. Population growth is expected to decline from the 2015 projections, 38.8 million by 2060/61, previously 40 million by 2056. With people living longer and a much older population than today. The economy will be smaller with less employed to service the aged and unemployed. The number of Australians aged 65 and older will double to 8.9 million, 1 in 3 adults, down from 1 in 6 today.

2. Climate change will have a real and significant impact on the Australian economy. There will be a need for a transition in Australia’s carbon intensive economy, where “some sectors will need to adjust to falling demand for some exports, while new opportunities will be created in other sectors”.

3. Long Covid with its lingering repercussions, with a slow economy, deficit budgets and high debt are here to stay, at least for the next 40 years.

http://treasury.gov.au/publication/2021-intergenerational-report

This is the bloke who says I'm boring, but who continues to reel off, word for word, dreary predictions anyone can see in the media, which are based on the same computer models that got climate change so wrong, and scared the living daylights out of everyone with the predictions of thousands of deaths in Australia from the WuFlu. There are no crystal balls; nobody knows what's going to happen 20, 30, 40 or 50 years from now. What happens with Communist China in the immediate future is the thing that should be occupying the minds of these modern day Nostradamuses.

Dear Paul,

Thank You for this discussion.

What's the point of an Intergenerational Report?

As explained on the web:

In simple terms it's supposed to show everyone what
Australia could look like in 40 years if the current
policy settings remain the same. It is designed to be
a wake up call to what needs to be changed. It looks
at current trends in population growth, ageing, and
government spending and projects them forward to see
what the impact they will have on federal government
figures in four decades.

This way it gives policymakers time to make corrections
if necessary.

I imagine that our ageing population will have a big
impact on the economy and that will necessitate adjustments
to be made in so many areas - from jobs, new skills,
health, education, population size, and much, much more.

Just go back to what all these reports stated before COVID !
What they should be saying is that by 2050 it doesn't matter what happens because if today's trends continue, people will be so dumb that everything will be irrelevant !
I'm talking about average white people !

.

Dear ttbn,

.

You wrote :

« There are no crystal balls; nobody knows what's going to happen 20, 30, 40 or 50 years from now. »

No doubt about that, ttbn.

Projections are not predictions. They are suppositions. Intelligent guesses based on previous experience.

In my view, the only interest in projecting current trends into the future is simply to look ahead to try to see where we are going instead of just staring at our feet.

Of course, we may not see the lion hiding in the bushes, waiting to pounce on us as we walk by, or the hunter who is about to shoot the lion, but our chances of reaching our destination by staring at our feet are minimal. We have a far better chance of reaching our destination by looking up to see what lies ahead despite the fact that we can’t see either the lion or the hunter.

Better to look ahead than to look at your feet, ttbn – especially when you’re driving your car or your motorbike or whatever.

That’s about the best you can do, but you might still get it wrong. You might still have an accident.

As you say : "there are no crystal balls".

.

There are some things to take from these reports, an analyse of present government polices and where they are taking us. There seems to be little political will to set new objective in the areas of taxation, job creation and social welfare. Calls to lower taxation whilst creating a growing government debt, with the government relying on economic growth to service that debt. Treasury indicated future economic growth will be sluggish under the present policies. There is no strong plan for job creation in newly developed cutting edge industries. The government seems to be paralysed into believing new jobs will simply grow from traditional economic activity, and there is no need for innovative development.

The growing number of Australians within the aged population will create ever increasing social welfare concerns, reasonable support for older Australians in the future, even at present levels, is not sustainable, and a new productive system replacing aged welfare needs to be introduced as a matter of urgency. During the pandemic the government allowed people to access superannuation which in itself will have negative consequences long into the future.

User pays up front just like most of my generation did. There are too many who travelled the World for years during which time they didn't contribute a Cent but now demand full Pension !
Then there are those career "students" who haven't actually entered any work force till their late 30's or later. They too hardly contributed.
Then there are business people who spent their whole life living off negative gearing & they contributed nothing !
They all demand to be looked after financially now ! There needs to be some reward for those who actually paid !

User pays
Looks like the above term is too challenging for the usual Lefties !

individual,

How many people do you know who haven't paid taxes?
Unless of course due to misfortunate or health issues
which is a different thing all together. Most
students get part time jobs, have to pay back their
fees, and when they end up being fully employed they pay
their full share. The same goes for other people. Just
about everyone in this country contributes in one way or
another. That's why our economy is the envy of many
countries.

To help remove the unsustainable aged welfare burden from the taxpayer, just as the government allowed access for young people to their superannuation to economically sustain themselves during the hard times of the pandemic, the government should impose a means test on the homes of aged welfare recipients. Many old folks on aged welfare are millionaires when it comes to property ownership. In that way aged welfare could continue, and only a modest rent would need to be charged by government. Cash payments could be reduced with the introduction of "payment in kind" for the old people, unsalable fruit, vegetable's, out of date groceries and on special occasions like Christmas and Easter and when one reaches 100, meat in the form of government sausages. For the fit and healthy, which includes all those aged under 90, out of those stuffy old houses and into the fresh air, I would like to see a 'Seniors National Service' introduced, I'm sure most old folks would have no problem and consider themselves useful and happy at the same time, with 40 hours minimum of physical work each week, a little bit of road repairs, ditch digging, grass cutting, nothing to strenuous for our old people. With my ideas in place I believe the aged welfare bill, could be reduced to zero, or even dare I say, a little modest profit for the government could result.

a means test on the homes of aged welfare recipients.
Paul1405,
There is !

Come on Paul, there is no need to start attacking the pensioner until you have first got the million or so dole bludgers out picking the fruit & vegetables going to waste for lack of workers.

And yes individual, there is a means test on area. Anything over 2.5 acres is considered as asset for pension calculations, unless you have owned it for 35 years. I know dozens who bought cheap acreage way out of town because they or their kids were into horses. Then the damn city grew out & grabbed them, making their little property more valuable, with no advantage to the owner.

Now with the kids & horses gone the property is merely an expense with high rates. Many don't wast to move, but would love to sell off most of the acreage. The councils won't let them subdivide to do so.

One of my kids wanted to build on my property, but even with 4000Sq M blocks just down the road, we are not allowed 2 houses on 20 acres. So don't blame the pensioner for the bureaucratic stupidity of local government.

Actually I see nothing wrong with us oldies using the assets accumulated over our working life to support ourselves in our age. Spending the kids inheritance is perfectly OK to my mind. I'd sell up in a flash & move to Home Hill, a nice little town on the Burdekin River if I could, but I'd have no chance of moving that lady so far from the grand kids. I could use the warmer climate, this mythical global warming is taking too long to get here.

How many people do you know who haven't paid taxes?
Foxy,
I have no proof as to has not paid any tax at all nor do I think it's possible not to. What is possible & is being done is to exploit every possible loophole to pay as little tax as possible. I have sat next the staunch Labor supporters in the office when they spent much of the day on the computer searching for these loopholes. Sharing three houses over the years with school teachers also showed who the real patriots were & it wasn't them !
There are no volunteers to pay taxes so, the only way is a flat tax where everyone pays the same rate full stop ! Too many enjoy benefits at the expense of others & that has to stop.
Also, reduce the insanely high Public Service salaries so that this Nation can become competitive again & pull its own weight instead of partying on China's lendings which they of course will take back soon in any shape & form !

individual,

I really can't argue with your logic.