Hinch on Home Ownership

[IQS.RLOW]

Isn't the issue that the government runs the risk that people will use the super to pay off their primary home (or buy one) and the primary home is not means tested for pension. (or worse, piss the money up against the wall)

So they pay off the home and then will depend on the state for a pension when the super should have been used to support them.

I am all for using the pension to do what you want, it is our money Ralf. The government runs the risk of supporting people that they hoped they would not have to when Keating implement his super policies.

NOPE.....

BTW Super was never originally meant to replace the pension.

Compulsory super was never introduced to give retired workers more comfort in retirement.
It may have been sold like that but Govts don't work like that.

It was introduced to reduce the burden on the budget, pure and simple.
It was designed for one thing alone. To reduce the pension and growing pressure on the social security budget.

Pity the libs opposed 15 % and let retirees take it as a lump sum , so they could spend the lot , then line up for pension

So you agree with forced savings of your earnings, forced to be collected at an ever expanding retirement age, to be rationed out through social security as a replacement for the pension?

What a shame plebs like you will be stuck with it
I've already set up a SMSF.

[LEFTWINGER supreme]

Isn't the issue that the government runs the risk that people will use the super to pay off their primary home (or buy one) and the primary home is not means tested for pension. (or worse, piss the money up against the wall)

So they pay off the home and then will depend on the state for a pension when the super should have been used to support them.

I am all for using the pension to do what you want, it is our money Ralf. The government runs the risk of supporting people that they hoped they would not have to when Keating implement his super policies.

NOPE.....

BTW Super was never originally meant to replace the pension.

Compulsory super was never introduced to give retired workers more comfort in retirement.
It may have been sold like that but Govts don't work like that.

It was introduced to reduce the burden on the budget, pure and simple.
It was designed for one thing alone. To reduce the pension and growing pressure on the social security budget.

Pity the libs opposed 15 % and let retirees take it as a lump sum , so they could spend the lot , then line up for pension

So you agree with forced savings of your earnings, forced to be collected at an ever expanding retirement age, to be rationed out through social security as a replacement for the pension?

What a shame plebs like you will be stuck with it
I've already set up a SMSF.

Some people have never seen that sort of coin in a lifetime , so yes an annuity income is a good thing in situations like that , and nobody is forced to work until they're 70 , some people are simply hopeless with money

[IQS.RLOW]

NOPE.....

BTW Super was never originally meant to replace the pension.

Compulsory super was never introduced to give retired workers more comfort in retirement.
It may have been sold like that but Govts don't work like that.

It was introduced to reduce the burden on the budget, pure and simple.
It was designed for one thing alone. To reduce the pension and growing pressure on the social security budget.

Pity the libs opposed 15 % and let retirees take it as a lump sum , so they could spend the lot , then line up for pension

So you agree with forced savings of your earnings, forced to be collected at an ever expanding retirement age, to be rationed out through social security as a replacement for the pension?

What a shame plebs like you will be stuck with it
I've already set up a SMSF.

Some people have never seen that sort of coin in a lifetime , so yes an annuity income is a good thing in situations like that , and nobody is forced to work until they're 70 , some people are simply hopeless with money

They can just live on canned dog food until they get access to their own money?
They might not have seen that sort of coin before and nor will they ever with the likes of you around.
They will end up paying for their own pension and that is all they will ever have.

The pension should be completely separate from any super.

If Cawke and Cheating had been honest, they should have told people their forced untouchable savings were being confiscated and will be rationed out.
What next? If your super is over the pension amount, you redistribute it to useless fucks like you to make up your inability to earn enough over your life to even pay for your own pension?

As usual, in all cases the government cannot be trusted with your money.

[Rorschach]

Love the opening line IQS...

LWhinger is a clueless CFMEU member after all.

Yes Whinger they can retire earlier and not access the pension till they reach the mandatory age. BTW Super should be 12% by 2025. So yes it is going up.

Idiots like Kelly O'Dwyer are too young to have a clue about Super apparently.

The claim: Assistant Treasurer Kelly O'Dwyer says that Australia's superannuation system "was set up to be an alternative to the aged pension so that people didn't have to rely upon the aged pension or even the part pension".
The verdict: Key figures in the introduction of compulsory super in Australia say it was introduced for a number of reasons, including a desire to relieve pressure on the social security system as the population ages. But the governments of the day did not sell the policy as a way to get people off the pension and instead said that most people would still get at least a part pension. Ms O'Dwyer is ill-informed.

Origins....

In the late 1980s, superannuation was sold as a supplement to the aged pension.

In 1989, the prime minister Mr Hawke said: "The pension will always be there for those who need it, but it will be supplemented by a range of superannuation options."

In that year, Hawke government minister Brian Howe announced what he called "the first comprehensive national policy on retirement income", which included initiatives on both superannuation and social security payments such as the age pension.

The policy talked of the ageing of the population and asserted that retirement expectations of the baby boomers could not be met by the age pension alone.

Instead, workers could "look forward to a better standard of living in retirement by supplementing the pension from their own savings".

Mr Howe said that "the age pension system is primarily designed as social security, whereas compulsory superannuation is about encouraging savings over and above the pension system".

"It was never imagined that one would replace the other," he says.

Mr Keating's social security minister Neal Blewett noted in his published diary that around this time Mr Keating viewed "workers' superannuation very much as a top-up to the aged pension and not as a substitute for it" but had to be reminded that "our objective in widening superannuation cover is to moderate pressures on the budget from age pensions as the population ages".

The current superannuation system was developed from 1986 onwards, with universal compulsory superannuation coming into force in 1992.

It was introduced for a number of reasons, including a desire to relieve pressure on the social security system as the population ages.

But the governments of the day did not sell the policy as a way to get people off the pension and instead said that most people would still get at least a part pension.

[IQS.RLOW]

Hey Bobby,

I saw you posting elsewhere and arguing with crocodile.
Aside from the old "never take financial from teh intardwebz", you should listen to that guy far more carefully and ask questions instead of trying to defend the indefensible.

Crocodile is correct on ~ 97% on what he posts and puts the socialist retards over yonder to shame everytime they jump in with what they think is their "aha!" moment, without even trying, he easily smashes the bullshit back over the fence.

He knows economics and finance and has the ability to explain the crux of the economics clearly and in a compact format, which you will find hard to come across. So pay attention and don't listen to the bullshit spewed by the likes of Monk, Nails or any other lefty jizzbucket over there.

The lefty socialist twats that infest that forum have no clue and wouldn't know the first thing about economics.or what to do with their money
Mainly because leftys don't usually have it. They only think they know what to do with your money