Being poor 'nothing to be proud of'

[Lance]

Yep, this from one of our illustrious Leaders.

"Taking the pension shouldn't be something you aspire to, it should be something you try to avoid because it signifies you're in a low income group — in other words you're poor or you know, close to poor," he told ABC.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-02/d ... st/8157924

Well, there ya go.
I imagine this chap will refuse/decline his Pension when he leaves office.

[Dot]

Because I am a lady and don't want to write myself a letter I shall refrain from saying what I think of that twat

[BruceS]

Typical ABC I think?
Confusing pension with income?

[JohnM]

Shows you just how disconnected the current politicians are, we are on the pension because that was promised as a reward for our years of hard work,we paid our taxes and pension levees, so we could have a pension in our old age, we were not forced in to a superannuation fund as the next generation were, we were however forced into several "pension funds" and "Pension Levees" administered by the ATO on behalf of the government that promised us a Liveable Pension on our retirement. then proceeded to use the the funds elsewhere and then complain that there was not enough money.
Let's start an investigation into what happened to that money.
I the Budget of 1966 the then government introduced a three percent levee on all income to go into a "Pension fund", to the best of my knowledge this has never been rescinded and is still being paid,
This fund was pirated in 1972 by the then labour government who changed the title of those receiving "Commonwealth Benefits" To those receiving "Commonwealth Pensions" thus allowing access to the pension fund.
Then later on the government of the time introduced another 3 percent levee administered by the ATO and called it a superannuation levee, as far as I know this also is still current for those that are not paying into a recognised Super fund.
It wasn't until the turn of the century that compulsory Superannuation was introduced for those in permanent employment. It is only now that the benefits of that is becoming obvious. However what will happen to those that haven't been in permanent employment?
May be it is time that the Government ministers are held responsible for their departments, and the misuse of the funds.
Let's petition for the politicians to be put on an Old age Pension when they retire, then maybe we will see some balance.

[bagmaker]

Perhaps another Canberra rally? This time park on the lawns, grey water discharge accepted happily

[bob r]

I would like to see that happen John but I don't think any on this forum will.

Bob

[Peter]

Most of OUR politicians are so far removed from the reality of the lives of everyday people the haven't a clue how ordinary people function.. Its all about getting voted in at the next election and catering to the masses. The baby boomers had very little help if any from the government we knuckled down and got there under our own steam. Today, baby bonus, housing bonus, child care bonus and the list goes on. Most baby boomers did not have annual holidays in Bali or Hamilton island we learnt to have just what we could afford which was something very simple or no trips away. A lot of the younger generation today want all the government benefits and still have flash over seas holidays. It would be great to see the government bring some balance into the equation. A lot of baby boomers did not have the opportunity to financially get ahead ( we had high interest rates on home loans and super only a relatively recent ) so its only reasonable the pension should be forthcoming to assist them. The government certainly has done everything to assist the top end of town financially just look at the recent changes to super changes retired people cannot add to super if they downsize their homes however the top end of town can still contribute obscene amounts into super. I can see in the future that there will be wide class distinctions as some really wealthy people get ahead where ordinary workers often working casual hours will not accumulate large super accounts. I cannot see a lot of opportunities for many people due to a reduction the numbers of people required because of computerisation and robots etc. Anyhow I have had my rant.

[Dot]

Perhaps another Canberra rally? This time park on the lawns, grey water discharge accepted happily

Ha ha I got a holiday from the old CMCA forum for suggesting the very same thing apart from the grey water discharge. I loathe Canberra with a passion, any other part of the country and I would be there.

[jon_d]

Typical liberals.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.

hehe.

I thought the forum was meant to avoid politics and the associated discussions.

[native pepper]

I would most definitely agree with everyones sentiments and believe our political system doesn't represent what it should in any way. It's just a gravy train for them and the senior bureaucracy, one which they don't deserve. Plus they think and go in the opposite position to rational logic and always get it wrong.

If they looked at it from a real economic standpoint, rather than from a vested interest is the only direction blindness. They see that the best economic way, is to increase the aged pension so it represents the average wage. To ideologues, this is irrational and couldn't be afforded, when the truth is, it can easily be afforded. Those reaching the aged pension age are looking to enjoy themselves, travel and do new things. All that stops them is money and even those who have good super funds, are finding it dwindling from multiple taxes, management fees and rampant global Inflation. So the more money you give pensioners, then more money goes into the community, especially country and coastal communities. This creates jobs, new small business and a lot of the money comes back to the government in the form of more taxes from big spending mature pensioners. Problem solved, except for........