We recently had a negative post about the Age Pension in Australia.

Unclear messaging, false information, and ignorance have left many Australians concerned lately that the Age Pension will be wound back, or even abolished entirely.

The Treasurer has said that these concerns are unfounded, admitting that the government has not made the facts clear. Some politicians have been making “unclear statements”.

The Age Pension is sustainable, and “strongly supported by both major parties”. And, in fact, an Actuaries Australia report advises that the cost of the pension to taxpayers is actually decreasing.

Governments know that it is “really poisonous” to change too much about the the pension. Age Pensioners make up a large proportion of voters; they are a very strong bloc. Any political party trying to reduce or abolish the Age Pension can expect to “be punished at the ballot box”.

Much of the fear about the Age Pension comes from the media and the aggressive, greedy and pampered superannuation industry, that claims to be replacing the Age Pension, and is putting about ridiculous claims on how much money retirees need to live a comfortable life.

Well, the media and the super funds do not run the show. Nor do ill-informed blabber mouths.

The only change I would make to the age pension, is to require anyone who receives it, in fact anyone who receives any government pension, to always wear in public a certain coloured badge or ribbon with the letter 'P' conveying to everyone the fact that they rely on government for their living.

Yuyutsu,

Great system, it worked/ in Germany when Jews had to wear an identifying sign; you keep good company.

The treasurer is right. The Retirement Income Review
found that the Age Pension is economically sustainable
and is at no risk.

The same advice was also reported in the Inter-Generational
Report (IGR) 2021 and endorsed by the government. The age
pension will be here long into the future for many
generations.

The economic fact is that it is becoming more affordable,
not less. It is also the political reality that any
politician who tried to take away the pension would be
tossed out of office.

Yuyutsu,

You have been revealing your true, unpleasant self lately. I agree with Hasbeen. In fact the yellow Star of David came to mind before I looked at his post. Disgusting comment from you.

Dear Is Mise and Ttbn,

The differences are:
* In Nazi Germany, wearing the Star of David had many horrendous ramifications. Nothing of the sort was contemplated here, only a bit of shame.
* Under Nazi rules, one's status was determined at birth: nobody ever chose to be considered a Jew nor was there any way one could escape that status and fate.

How about, also, another colour/letter for "public servants", MPs and the like who live off [even much more] money taken involuntarily from others? Perhaps the letter 'T' for "Thief"?

Yuyutsu,
Many categories were not determined at birth under the Nazis, political outlook for one and non-political resistance to the State for another.

Dear Is Mise,

Resistance to the Nazis and disagreeing with their political outlook were a source of pride, not shame. There would also be fear involved because we all know the horrendous consequences one would suffer if the Nazis found out, but nothing of the sort was suggested in this discussion.

Thus suppose you were proud to accept money that was grabbed from others without their consent, be it a pension or a salary, then you would consider wearing the appropriate sign as a badge of honour, a medal rather than an embarrassing humiliation.

Yuyutsu,
You said that under Nazi rules one’s status was determined at birth, I merely pointed out where this statement is wrong.

Yuyutsu,
You're exposing your utter ignorance on what the old Age pension is all about. People have worked & contributed for over half a century towards their retirement for which the pension is designated.
I'd rather propose people such as yourself to wear a P to convey to everyone that you're a parasite who relies on Govt i.e. taxpayer funding for a living !

Dear Individual,

«People have worked & contributed for over half a century towards their retirement for which the pension is designated.»

And that money has long gone up in smoke. Oops....

Not only it no longer exists, but government is now in a trillion-dollar debt.

Any money these people accept now, will instead be taken, even without consent, by force if necessary, from the hard labour of future generations. Shouldn't one feel ashamed if they accept such money? I certainly would.

individual,

That's right: everyone has contributed so that the pension is there for those who need it, and the system is here to stay. I'm sure that people who rely on the pension would like to be wealthy enough to not need it. There are strict rules on who qualifies and who doesn't. Those rules are available for the critics to see. Those who think that those rules are not tough enough are certainly too well off themselves to understand that it is no picnic living on the pension. It's adequate. That's all that can be said about it.

Yuyutsu,
Why do you live in Australia?

Yuyutsu,
When today's old age pensioners were young, they paid for the old then just as the younger now pay for us & the younger after you will pay for yours.
In basic English it's called future investment. It smacks of utter ignorance if not right-out stupidity to claim that the the old age pensioners are on welfare. Welfare is what many of today's young are on for not wanting to work i.e. getting paid for not contributing anything.
Let's have you pay taxes & levies etc for 50+ years & then say you don't feel eligible for the old age pension.
You'd need to be a total moron, stupid beyond all imagination not to understand ! If you think your taxes are wasted you're partially correct because they're wasted on people such as yourself by the looks of it !

People have lost jobs. Businesses have shut down, many for good, thanks to the Covid hysteria. But part-pensioners have also suffered, for the second time during the current Coalition regime, the first time when Morrison was Treasurer, and the fabulously wealthy Malcolm Turnbull was PM.

This time, the Morrison government decided that part pensioners needed to 'preserve' their assets - i.e. the savings pensioners managed to scrape together and the funds that (rightly) preclude them from a full pension. The 'brilliant' forecast was that the stock market would plunge.

What the government did was to halve the minimum payout that the self-funded private funds were paying out each month. Thus doing the savers a 'good turn' - supposedly.

The problem was that the forecasters got it wrong - again - and the stock market boomed, meaning increasing assets, and an almost weekly reduction in the Age Pension, without any increase from the private funds. The situation remains the same today. Inhumane and insane.

Couldn't expect the knowalls, ageists, smartarses and pensioner-haters to be aware of that, of course.

Dear Is Mise,

«Why do you live in Australia?»

Well I had to park my body somewhere and other places had even more oppressive regimes.

One thing for certain - I have not come here to steal from or rob anyone.

---

Dear Individual,

«When today's old age pensioners were young, they paid for the old then»

It is wonderful to support vulnerable others, it has much merit, nothing wrong about it.
I never said that they should not have paid what they paid,
only that it is shameful to accept moneys that were taken from others without their consent.

«just as the younger now pay for us & the younger after you will pay for yours.»

They won't.
I pay for myself and will never accept such payments that were taken from others by force. When I no longer have the funds to support myself then it is my time to die.

«In basic English it's called future investment.»

When you invest, the onus to return the fruits of your investment is on the one(s) you handed your investment to - not on innocent others who were not involved, who in fact were not even born at the time.

«right-out stupidity to claim that the the old age pensioners are on welfare.»

I made no such claims.
I noticed that this is not the first time, that you seem to have this tendency to read your own thoughts rather than what I have actually written.

«Let's have you pay taxes & levies etc for 50+ years & then say you don't feel eligible for the old age pension.»

I have not even mentioned the word 'eligible'.
There is no dispute that older people with insufficient funds of their own are eligible for aged pensions.
But "eligible" does not mean "obliged" - actually accepting the offered pension is a right, not a duty!

Yuyutsu,
How do you feel about flood relief, bushfire and drought, aren't the recipients of those in the same category as pensioners?

Dear Is Mise,

Unfortunately, anyone who chooses to accept benefits of money taken from others without consent, is in the same category.
To avoid being in that category myself, I refrained from applying for several government refunds that I was "entitled" to.

So long as government payments are tainted by such money, those of us who value their moral integrity may only seek relief payments from charities, family, friends and insurance companies.

With some goodwill, this situation could be corrected by making personal taxes voluntary.
I have given it much thought and believe that it can be done, had government listened to me, in a manner that would cause practically no loss of revenue.

ttbn,

I refute your claim that I made "a negative post about the Age Pension". My position on aged welfare is two pronged, sustainability and equitability, I believe neither is delivered by the present system. For a politician to claim "no cuts" is a lie, just in recent years the minimum age has been raised from 65 to 67, and likely to rise to 70 in the foreseeable future, a cost saving in itself. The government keeps the deeming rate for notional calculation of interest earned well above the market rate, another saving. With a growing aged population, living longer, there is greater demand for both income support and aged care support from the total welfare budget, which is 35% of the total Federal budget. With growing interest payments on national debt, and demands for lower taxes etc, expenditure increases for direct welfare payments are not sustainable.

Equitability, there is none when it comes to aged welfare, pnsioners are not a homogeneous lot. At one extreme are those renting, with little in the way of assets or cash, these folks are getting by on the pension only. With a liberal means test, people owning their home, with assets and a generous amount of cash in the bank, are reasonably well off, and still receiving a full or part pension..

Yuyutsu,
Unless you declare what king of employment you're in we can only assume that you too accept taxpayer money !

The age pension is a major source of income for a MAJORITY of Australian retirees, according to well-known financial guru and author of 22 books on money matters, Noel Whittaker. So, all the pension's embittered critics are banging their heads against a wall.

Not all receive a full pension of course. Eligibility is decided on assets or income - whichever will give the least pension.

Engaging a good financial adviser is the best way to see if you qualify. Even a small pension entitles you to concessions on medication: important for oldies.

I receive a fraction of the Service Pension as my wife is employed and I spend it on reloading components and ammunition, I return it to the State in the form of killing foxes, feral cats and the occasional wild dog.
I live rent free as my wife owns the house and the home block, my eldest son owns the property.
When I turned 75 I gave away my real estate and all that I own is my guns and related gear and the ute.
The much prizes Riley car belongs to my youngest son and I have its use as long as I like, all very legal and when I die I will leave very little.

Is Mise,

You will have the sanctimonious green hornet on your back for spending pension money on things to do with firearms.

Contraire dear ttbn, under a Seniors National Service, a decent old chap like Issy, doing approved work at his age, should be rewarded. Unlike the old fart I'll call the Black Death who was throwing taxpayer dosh at some sleezy politician a couple of years back, he should be penalized.

BTW; The Green Hornet fought for the good of the people, you can call me the GH if you like. I'll just call you the Black Death, fair enough.

You probably meant 'au contraire', genius. Tidy up your English before making a twit of yourself with foreign languages you cannot even copy off Google properly.

I didn't call you the Green Hornet, but a green hornet. Can't expect you to comprehend the difference.

Black Death? Where did you pluck that from? It bears no relevance to anything.

Call yourself a progressive! You are are still living in the past with your rot about Cory Bernardi. Get some new material, you old bore.

Didn't copy from Google, just find your guff amusing. Black Death seems fitting given your record of name calling. You think you're so smart, without realising how dumb you actually are. You throw em out, I'll throw em back. You started this, why involve me with something Is Mise put up.