Super Moderator
I have worked for the NSW Government for about 36 of the last 39 years, if I had worked in a psychiatric hospital for that period I would have been entitled to the NSW public service indexed superannuation. However until the Federal Government WorkChoices legislation the NSW Government didn't consider nurses who worked in public hospitals to be "public servants" and as such I only entered a superannuation scheme a couple of years before it became compulsory.
Unlike the young of today, many complaining that the burdon of my generation is too much for the public purse, I have only had about 25 years of contribution to super where a younger person would have had about 40 years of contribution at my age. Surely this factor should be considered when they are amending the aged pension.
Secondly, while my house may be around a million dollars of value, my rates are based upon this same (VG) value, which means that I will have to pay a greater proportion of my retirement income over someone who lives outside a metropolitan area on lower property values. Why should someone who has all their community ties in a particular community be forced to sell up and move somewhere they know no one just to qualify for the aged pension. More than that the banked value of that downsized/liquidated asset will delay their being awarded the pension until a period of years have passed irrespective of the remaing balance (or lack of balance) in the bank.
You won't find me on: faceplant; Scipe; Infragam; LumpedIn; ShapCnat or Twitting. I'm just not that interesting.
Wizard
This is highly likely a fishing expedition by the govt, designed to soften us up for some lesser evil. If they went ahead with this sort of stuff, but still bought in their PPL scheme, it's suicide. Plain and simple. Their biggest demographic is the ancient - they'll be very brave indeed to **** them off.
AT REST
Originally Posted by Discomark
Joe Hockey confirms pension age could rise to 70
“That no changes to pension promise is about to be broken"
It's all OK folks, Mr Hockey's office explained that age increase for eligibility only applies to pensioners - not to politicians (or ex-pollies)
AT REST
So we'll all think that they're really good blokes when they make only a little change ?
Super Moderator
Oh, gee wizz, I didn't realise that.
Its all O.K. then, so long as those who have dedicated several 3 year (fully paid) periods of their lives to us, should be rewarded with a non-taxable index linked superannuation annuity.
You won't find me on: faceplant; Scipe; Infragam; LumpedIn; ShapCnat or Twitting. I'm just not that interesting.
ChatterBox
SubscriberNo the 70 pension age is just a diversion to try and hide the fine print, ( or soften us up for stage 2)which will be including your own home as part of the asset test which will have a lower limit .
This is to make those with higher value homes reverse mortgage them or sell and move to a smaller unit using the change to pay for their own retirement rather than a pension the govt can't afford.
AT RESTNothing will happen, Abbot made a pledge before the last election the pension wouldn't be touched nor hospitals. He doesn't tell lies does he?
Master
Never assume you know what is going to happen. Family home and up to $1.15 million in assets for a couple before they lose the pension, $750k for a single, wish I had that much in assets and still got benefits from the government. Prisoners cost $300k per annum per prisoner to keep locked up, illegal immigrants costing billions, unemployed, single mothers, family tax benefits part A and B where does it end. A single with kids on $150k still gets Family Tax benefits but a couple with a combined income of $90k has their benefits cut. We have become a land of entitlement. Where does it end?
Swaggie
What would happens if the ALP and Greens block supply in the senate before the seating of the new senate?
Is the government forced by the constitution to call an election or it can plot along until have control in the senate (providing that the new senators approve the budget)?
Just curios, I do not think that it wold happen.
Master
If the ALP and the greenies block supply in the senate the government can call for a double dissolution requiring a whole new election for both the house and the senate. Not sure if the coalition would be prepared to risk that, but then again if they plod along until the change of senate seats until July the will have to deal with senator Palmer............
Posting Permissions
| Search AULRO.com ONLY! |
Search All the Web! |
|---|
|
|
|
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks