Thread: Pension Age may move to 70

It is interesting to read these comments,I have been on a Pension (disability) now aged since 1983(worked from 1961-1983),and believe me raising a family and keeping a home over our heads (private rental rural) took some doing, yes, I took up part time school bus driving, up to the allowed amount per year,but then everything that we own is ours,pensioners do/did not qualify for finance/HP except through the shady money lenders with high interest, but I can now relax I have passed the magic age of 70 so I won't feel guilty when I receive my pension each fortnight

For those interested, look up the current aged pension rate for single or married couple non home owners and see if you could live on that amount for a month or so,while meeting all your current financial commitments.

cheers

I'am off to pay my rent & collect my Pommie Land Rover Mag

I'm an old codger, ( 68 years young) and still working as a full time bus driver doing service work. I can't see me retiring before 70 anyway, so this news is nothing to me.

I have now been working for 53 years and for the life of me, I can't see me joining the bowling mob down at the local bowlo. I have had some setbacks in life which is part of the reason I am still working, but just the same sitting around idle with nothing to do would send me to an early grave.

As long as I pass the annual medical ( for over 60 years age group) for public passenger vehicle drivers, I will keep going, maybe slow down to casual work in a couple of years.

Retirement.............I'll think about it in a few years time.

Reading some of the comments here it appears that some people were living under a rock and come out to the real world just now.
Weak up! we are not in a fantasy world we are living in a world that more and more people over 50 are "told to give them a job" we living in a world with a massive unemployment and the majority of them are from the young generation.
Going by the "ideal world that people have to work until 70 (providing that they get a job) what are you going to do with the young generation?
Do you expect that a brick layer will be do the same job that he is doing now when he is over 60?
If teachers retire at the age of 70, who is going to bother to study to become a teacher when the possibilities of finding a job will depends in mortality?
What happens when there are no people that study some professions when they know that there are not chance to find a job and when the country run out of employed professional for that disciplines there are no one to fill them?
What I am telling you it is nothing new, it happens now in other countries were education is free and there is an oversupply of professionals.

In this "globalization world" if you like to improve the employment rate people have to work for peanuts. face it it is a reality.
Do you like to do your actual job for $200 per month? NO
Then...............

Gday mate hows it goin you made foreman yet ??? , naaa cant get any of the old dudes blocking advancement to **** off or retire .

Expanding on my above comments and working for peanuts read this:
Thu 19 Apr 2012
From Joe Hockey

Quote:

"We are all living longer, and the longer we rely on government handouts, the greater the burden for taxpayers and particularly those that follow," he told Lateline.

"We need to be vigilant. We need to compare ourselves with our Asian neighbours, where the entitlements programs of the state are far less than they are in Australia.

"If we talk about the Asian century ... then the Asian countries are our competition, our children's competition.

"Hong Kong is our direct competition, as is Singapore, as is Korea in different ways, Vietnam, Indonesia."

End of Quote:

It is nothing new to me, John Howard said that in the 80's.

My super has only just recovered from the GFC, so I've lost 4-5 years of growth.
If they want people to be able to live off super they're going to have to make it more attractive to put money into it when working. There should be a greater tax credit based on the amount that having super will reduce the demand for a government pension.
One problem is at the bottom end of the job market where the number of low skill jobs has shrunk through mechanization so there are fewer opportunities for people.
I changed careers at 50 and it was a good move in many ways, but could have been better financially.
I imagine any move to raise the pension age to 70 would come in progressively. For example, my retirement age for the pension is now 65.5 thanks to the previous government's changes to the rules.
I predict many people will be unable to afford to live in capital cities and will move to small towns or overseas.

.......further more, the proposal it is not only to bring the age pension to 70 but also, QUOTE:

Mr Harris said a 30 per cent saving could come from making pensioners hand the Government half the yearly increase in the value of their home.

"If the Government created a guarantee scheme under which people could put some of that growth in the value of that house, the increase of the value of their house - if the government provided a guarantee scheme - it sets up a potential revenue stream for people providing aged care services to develop those services and offer a much wider choice," he said.

Lateral Economics chief executive Nicholas Gruen says the Productivity Commission's ideas make good economic sense."End of quote

I remember that one party during an election campaign said:
If the *** come to power take the money from the banks and put it under the bed because they will take your assets

My Super got hammered to in the GFC and only in the last few weeks have I got back to the balance I had pre GFC. I paid extra contributions for years but it did me no good because the unit price was higher then than it is now.

Also got stung with the excess contributions tax in the year they lowered the super contributions threshold. Shouldn't the Govt be encouraging people to contribute to their own retirement rather than penalising them for doing so