Email

Next budget will 'get it right' for pensioners

Posted October 10, 2008 09:08:00
Updated October 10, 2008 10:12:00

Pension pledge ... 'we are confident we will get this right' (www.flickr.com: Orin Optiglot)

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd says the Federal Government will be able to bring relief to pensioners in next year's budget.

The Government has been criticised in recent days after senior ministers appeared to give conflicting views on whether pensions would be lifted next year.

Mr Rudd says pension reform is expensive, but he has indicated the Government will go ahead with it.

"Every $10 a week increase results in $8 billion across the forward estimates," he said.

"That's a lot of money, that's why we have got to get it right.

"But we are confident we will get this right by the time of the next budget."

Mr Rudd has told Fairfax Radio the Government will definitely deliver a pension increase next year.

"We are absolutely determined to deliver pension reform," he said.

"We said back at budget time this is a complex exercise, it involves millions of Australians, it's very expensive.

"We will do it and we will do it by the next budget."

Tags: community-and-society, welfare, government-and-politics, the-budget, federal-government, australia

Comments (71)

Comments for this story are closed. No new comments can be added. If you would like to have your say on this issue, you can do so via the Emails section of our Opinion pages.

• Robert:

  10 Oct 2008 11:04:31am

  Maybe we can put FoodWatch and FuelWatch to good use and have our pensions indexed to what they say is the inflation effect of rising prices. The CPI index is a useless number that doesn't really reflect what pensioners have to suffer in cost increases.
  
  I hope more businesses get on board with this: let's remember, most pensioners spend their pensions - rent/mortgage, fuel, energy, groceries. The mulitplier effect in the economy of the pension dollar is a big boost to "growth". If you're a business owner, you should want pensioners to have a little disposable income.

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • hugh jampton:

    10 Oct 2008 12:07:02pm

    The age pension is currently indexed to average weekly earnings, not the CPI. However, ven though that is better than the CPI it is probably not ideal.

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • Katie:

    10 Oct 2008 12:20:32pm

    Yet most wages/salaries arnt annually indexed against the the CPI

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

• dragon:

  10 Oct 2008 11:09:03am

  " .. "Every $10 a week increase results in $8 billion across the forward estimates," he said. ."
  
  Wouldn't you just love to get one of these 'creative accountants' to do your taxes !
  
  

  Agree (1) Alert moderator

  • kenl:

    10 Oct 2008 11:26:03am

    I don't know what he means by "across the foward estimates" is that the same as saying per year??
    
    And what is a billion dollars these days? 100 million or 1000 million?
    
    At $800,000,000 a $10 week payrise will service 1.5mil pensioners, we would have at least that many?

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

    • Mark:

      10 Oct 2008 11:38:25am

      Across the forward estimates is the upcoming 4 years, and we have approx. 3 - 3.5 million pensioners.

      Agree (0) Alert moderator

      • Vulcan:

        10 Oct 2008 1:08:34pm

        Yes, but are the 3-3.5 million all aged pensioners trying to live off the pittance of the aged pension?

        Agree (0) Alert moderator

      • Mark:

        10 Oct 2008 1:27:43pm

        Yes, there are 3-3.5m on the pension.

        Agree (0) Alert moderator

    • Ben:

      10 Oct 2008 11:43:57am

      My guess is they have done the figures for the baby boomer generation and had to have a sit down.
      
      I think the figure I saw was something like 5 million baby boomers will retire, assuming at least half of them don't need the pension that is still another 2.5 million additional pensioners to worry about... makes you wonder if the pension can even been sustained at it's current level :(

      Agree (0) Alert moderator

      • JC:

        10 Oct 2008 1:34:35pm

        Yep I agree that they've probably had to sit down. Particularly now factoring in what is happening on global markets and the resultant effect on super pension payments - unless you are receiving a defined benefit payment. Also factoring in potential slow down in resource sales, particularly iron ore (refer Mt Gibson minerals)
        
        

        Agree (0) Alert moderator

    • hugh jampton:

      10 Oct 2008 12:02:37pm

      'Forward Estimates' are standard government practice - they are estimates of income and expenditure for the 3 years following the budget year. Try Googling 'forward estimates 2008' within Australia and you'll see lots of examples. So accross the forward estimates means the total for the 3 fiscal years after the current one (2008/9).
      
      They are not 'creative accounting' - they are an estimate based on known facts like the amount of pension and the number of pensioners - adjusted for the mortality rate (fewer pensioners) and the expected number of retirees (more pensioners). They are simply a part of responsible and accountable government. When your budgeting for a country, it's a good idea to thinkabout what might happen in the future.
      
      A billion is one thousand million

      Agree (0) Alert moderator

• Julian London:

  10 Oct 2008 11:20:01am

  Dear PM,
  Pensioners are mistreated by most governments . Lets see what you come up with, Mr Rudd. They should be the happiest in our community- but are often the most miserable- because of our neglect.
  
  The decent thing to do, would be to make an ex gratia payment immediately; since they are going (on your own admission) to get one anyway, after a review.
  
  Get your Christmas 'cape' on Scrooge and put your hand in our pocket. We won't mind! Show us what you are made of!

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • Steve:

    10 Oct 2008 11:48:47am

    I assume by 'ex gratia payment' you mean a one-off. Since we have three million or so pensioners, let's do some maths. Let x be the amount of this payment in dollars:
    
    3,000,000x = ?
    
    Any pension reform is going to be very expensive. Better get it right.

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

    • Mark:

      10 Oct 2008 12:04:16pm

      You get the idea now why increasing the weekly amount of the pension will be expensive. With y the amount of weekly increase, the cost is:
      
      3,000,000 x 52 x y = ?

      Agree (0) Alert moderator

      • Jovial Monk:

        10 Oct 2008 12:37:07pm

        Not only that, for many pensioners in rental accommodation an increase in the pension results in an increase in rent. I think Rudd could have increased rental assistance. Outlawing poker machines would be good too!
        
        Howard/Costello gave many selffunded retirees access toi the aged pension, I wonder if that is sustainable?

        Agree (0) Alert moderator

      • Phyl:

        10 Oct 2008 12:55:53pm

        "Howard/Costello gave many selffunded retirees access toi the aged pension"
        
        Yes and if I see one more advert telling people who have "too much money to receive the pension" that they should come in and work out a "strategy" to "reorganise" their money so that they can get a pension, I'll scream! What a scam!

        Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • chalkie:

    10 Oct 2008 11:56:45am

    "Pensioners are mistreated by most governments "
    
    The irony is that the present pensioners are the immediately prior "stingy" voters who a. considered 25% male median wage adequte but when they are the recipients decide this is not enough and b. saw the demographic writing on the wall and chose, every year, to do nothing about it.
    
    While the individual misery is unmistakable, as a group they are reaping what they so stingily sowed, and it is this hypocracy that taints their legitimate calls for additional welfare.

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

    • Julian London:

      10 Oct 2008 12:50:25pm

      Well, unless you want to exterminate them or leave them in poverty, something must be done. It is obvious with the rampant inflation of the last few months that they are behind the 8 ball. I think that we should make a payment now, to aleviate things- and carry on with the review; tout de suit.

      Agree (0) Alert moderator

• a. aitchison:

  10 Oct 2008 11:21:13am

  not knocking, but our cousins cross the tasman sea are getting next week approx. $25 single and & $ 47 married couple- huge reforms by helen clarks labour party. however this is shadowed by an upcomming election.
  also the party has honoured ALL previous election promises in the three year tenure, with the exception that tax cuts this years budget, may not take place because of financial market uncertainty. is it fair to make comparison???

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • Mark:

    10 Oct 2008 11:40:20am

    It is fair, but you should take into account the fact that pensioners in NZ receive significantly less money than pensioners in Australia, even after the proposed increase.

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

    • a aitchison:

      10 Oct 2008 11:56:34am

      hi mark, not sure where you get it from that NZ pension is less than australian -- ive been collecting NZ superanuation they call it for some years now and its MORE than that paid here. just read their budget on internet no dither and slither policy from labour party over there. cheers.

      Agree (0) Alert moderator

      • Mark:

        10 Oct 2008 12:14:07pm

        Apologies, disabled pensioners receive significantly less in NZ. Aged pensioners receive slightly less in NZ (after currency conversion), but if the proposed increase goes through it will roughly even up.

        Agree (0) Alert moderator

    • Ben:

      10 Oct 2008 11:58:30am

      Also our the Aus dollar is slightly stronger than the NZ dollar, making it easier to afford items imported into the country (which is nearly everything these days).

      Agree (0) Alert moderator

      • a.aitchison:

        10 Oct 2008 12:14:37pm

        hi ben and cheers -- you are exactly right BUT mr rudd talks about the HUGE cost of implementing the increase,
        which smudges what the discussion is about --- it must cost the govt NZ much the same monies to increase the NZ supper even more, and as stated the NZ pay is higher -- i live here now and there is LITTLE adjustment when i get the NZ one -- note im australian .

        Agree (0) Alert moderator

• Rob:

  10 Oct 2008 11:21:15am

  Rudd wants to bring in 1 million immigrants over the next 3 years something that puts many pressures on our society that we don't need. The majority will need tax payer support for some time at least, if not continuously. Will they be required to speak English? If not chances of them working are limited. I know we need more Labor party voters, stuff the consequences!
  
  Fix the problems that are here first I say before we import more!

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • Green:

    10 Oct 2008 11:34:20am

    I think you'll find that the majority of immigrants are people who are skilled, able to communicate in English and able to immediately get jobs in Australia.
    
    These people don't require taxpayer support when they arrive - they immediately contribute to the pool of taxpayers who fund pensions and other welfare payments.
    
    

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • twobob:

    10 Oct 2008 11:42:23am

    Funny way of looking at it.
    The reason for the immigration is because it grows the economy.
    That is so that business can make more money and again so that business has access to cheap labour.
    If you think this is about Labor votes then ask why the coalition supports it. Remember that the previous government also increased immigration. That said the ONLY thing that would get me to vote Liberal would be a promise to limit immigration. A snowflakes chance in hell I am afraid.
    

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

• Somewhat Perplexed:

  10 Oct 2008 11:25:21am

  Share market down 5 percent.
  
  Are we going to have an economy next next to draw a budget on.

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

• Bazza:

  10 Oct 2008 11:27:11am

  Thank you Mr Rudd
  The next Election We'll get it "Right" For Politicions!
  Its Not only about Money, Its about Services and respect too, in the country and in the cities

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

• Thomas:

  10 Oct 2008 11:31:36am

  Maybe the government could fund an increase by putting an additional tax on pokies. This national disease is where a lot of pension money gets wasted, then people complain about having to survive on baked beans and jam. I'm a self-funded retiree under 65 and I live quite well on less than the pension without any dependence on social security. My mother gets the pension and also lives quite well. People who want to live extravagantly should make more provision for their retirement, instead of expecting the taxpayer to foot the bill.

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • Mark:

    10 Oct 2008 11:41:40am

    Pokie taxes are collected by State governments, while welfare is paid by the Federal government.

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

• magoo:

  10 Oct 2008 11:36:01am

  Er, thanks Kev,
  
  I'll try to stay alive till then on Pal and pleasantries coz there's nothing else in this pensioner's pantry. At least we haven't been told to go eat rats or mice yet, unlike the North Korean peasantry.
  
  
  

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • Steve:

    10 Oct 2008 11:51:49am

    Totally independent students get less than pensioners, are not entitled to utility allowances, pension discounts, etc, and are docked for supplementing their income in any way. They still manage to live without starving. I'm curious as to why pensioners cannot.

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

    • Katie:

      10 Oct 2008 12:16:05pm

      I also find it quiet curious that magoo suggests that he/she has to live on pal, yet obviously has the money for a computer and internet connection (unless of course your at the local library which i doubt)
      
      Perhaps if there are a proportion (not all of course) of pensioners who are unable to budget for meals in a way that means its cheaper to live off dog food, the goverment would be better off investing thier money in education programs and support services to assist this limited few in budgeting appropaitely and still have a nutricious diet on this limited, however liveable income.
      
      Im over the having to live on pal arguement, its complete nonsense, if a 19 year old student can work out how to live on less with 1 years expereince in the real world... people with 70 years experience should be more than capable...
      
      But sure they should have a rise.... just use some realistic arguements people
      

      Agree (0) Alert moderator

    • Mark:

      10 Oct 2008 12:19:10pm

      Pensioners also get docked money for earning income (they just have to earn more before they are docked).
      
      Students do receive almost all the same discounts as pensioners through student discounts.
      
      Students receive less money than pensioners because it is expected that they will do some work to supplement their income. This is reasonable as students are physically at the prime of their lives and can fit some work in with their studies. Pensioners, on the other hand, receive more money because they are not expected to work.

      Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • hugh jampton:

    10 Oct 2008 12:22:30pm

    Ah, the old pensioner eating dog food furphy! always good for a laugh.
    
    It's easy to show that fresh fruit and vegetables, dried lentils, beans and many other freely available foods all provide a cheaper and healthier alternative to Pal (you can buy 2,5 kg of spuds for less than a 1.2 kg tin of Pal. If you're eating Pal (which I very much doubt) then you really are wasting your money.
    
    Anyway, I knew a woman who fed her husband Pal for years, never did him any harm. Unfortunately he was run over when chasing a car.

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

• Polly Prissypants:

  10 Oct 2008 11:50:08am

  I don't have a problem with paying more money to pensioners who really need it, but how about reducing the cost a little by tightening up the top end? The asset limits for a pensioner couple is about $870,000 (not including the house they live in. I'm sorry, but if you have assets worth that much, sell them and live off the money instead of getting welfare. This "I'm old gimme gimme gimme" entitlement complex people have in this country is costing us a fortune, and no politician will ever dare to stand up to the Grey Lobby.

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • Roberto:

    10 Oct 2008 12:24:29pm

    Couldn't agree more Polly. But let's expand this a little further to cover all of society. I have paid taxes for many years now, and quite disgusted at having tax money thrown at parents to subsidize their child-raising, at money thrown at parents to help pay for their day care, and money thrown at women for maternity leave. Why am I paying for other peoples' children?
    
    Then there is the billions in subsidy to Telstra to build a broadband network, hundreds of millions to bail out a sagging car industry, tax breaks for coal producers, and worst of all tax breaks for investors who can negative gear their way out of paying taxes.
    
    Everyone else's beak is in the trough; let' not edge out the pensioners.

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

    • Dave:

      10 Oct 2008 12:56:35pm

      I kinda agree with your stuff about baby payments and maternity leave etc...but can't agree with your complaints about giving money to Telstra, car manufactures etc...these businesses employ thousands of people and it means that all these people have jobs and aren't receiving welfare. If we get a decent broadband network this might even attract big multi-national companies to set up shop here, employing many more people. A one off payment to Telstra could save a lot of money if it means a couple hundred-thousand people aren't on welfare over the course of the next 20 years. One thing I could support is Telstra having to pay some of it back out of the money they will make out of the network in the coming years.

      Agree (0) Alert moderator

      • Roberto:

        10 Oct 2008 1:28:30pm

        Yes Dave, though my remark was less complaint than a point that everyone is at the trough. I get defensive, as a pensioner, at remarks that we are getting free money (i.e dole blodger) from the government when just about everyone else is getting a perk.
        Though for business freebies, I am a true blue free-market capitalist, and hate hand-outs to business, even when they do the blackmail trick of threatening to move shop and throw 10,000 people on the unemployment lines. This money to Telstra et al. should be loan money with repayments and interest to the taxpayers.

        Agree (0) Alert moderator

    • TD:

      10 Oct 2008 2:15:19pm

      Roberto, just out of interest, who pays the taxes that pay for your pension? Surely that's the generations behind you? If you don't want to support them then take a stand and refuse to have your medicinces subsidised, and pay full price for everything. That way their tax dollars can go somewhere else.
      
      And yes, you've no doubt paid your taxes for years, and which supported those generations in front of you. That's the way things work. It's give and take, so if you're going to take, then you must also expect to give.

      Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • Whatever:

    10 Oct 2008 1:49:55pm

    Ms Prissypants, well how about then we start with this! If it weren't for the 'Grey Lobby' as you call them do you think that you would be in the situation you are in today? When they were our age were they receiving hand-outs from the Govt. left right and centre for studying, getting pregnant, raising a child, paying for their child minding fees etc etc etc......
    How about we start by removing all of the above payments that WERE NOT available in the past, and then we would have a nice little nest egg to give the poor ol' pensioners their $20 increase!!

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

• KGee:

  10 Oct 2008 11:52:30am

  It would interesting to know how they calculate "forward estimates".
  Do they have "Forward estimates" for the $5000 baby bonus, PM's travel expenses, and all the ad hoc payments they promised when buying the votes they needed to get elected.
  If the pension increase will result in an $8b figure over the term of the budget which is 1 year that means there are 15.4 million pensioners ie 72.6% of the total population.
  Perhaps the PM would like to advise how many years are covered by "forward estimates".
  By the time they get around to include it in the budget, then pass the budget it will be 2 years that they have spent thinking about it and would have saved the government $1040 per pensioner per year which on their rubbery figures appears to be $16billion.
  Perhaps some clarification is needed.

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • hugh jampton:

    10 Oct 2008 12:31:06pm

    They have forward estimates for all government expenditure and income. If you were to do some research (use Google) you would quickly find out that forward estimates cover the 3 years after the current fiscal year. That took me 2 minutes to find out, probably less time than you took thinking up and calculating your response.
    
    Forward estimates are common to all governments and part of the budgetary process, they are even published on the internet. They are calculated from the best knowledge available eg for pensions it would include the amount of pension, the number of pensioners (adjusted for the expected mortality rate and the expected number of retirees).
    
    They are just a way of planning into the future, probably a good idea when running a country....
    
    

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

    • Kgee:

      10 Oct 2008 2:54:05pm

      Hugh
      The point I was making is the waffle used by politicians etc. to hide the facts. Budgets and estimates are well and good, they don't pay the rent or wages, they are a guide only. It is the reality of the implementation of those figures that produce the real facts.
      Also by holding back the increases (for 2 years) means you are not paying it out of your funds. - Why do you think banks etc take so long to clear cheques in your deposits to your account, so that they can invest on the short term money market at 8% which gives an effective return of close to 3000% pa.
      You need to look at real life not just rely on google.

      Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • AJ:

    10 Oct 2008 2:08:55pm

    The question is not have they estimated how much it will cost to have Rudd abroad most of the time (as he has been for his term as PM so far) but will they stick to the budget?

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

• 1936 Aussie:

  10 Oct 2008 11:54:03am

  All pensions should be the same with no cash handouts.
  Too often the system is manipulated to force pensioners to pay very high rent and therefore gain higher rent subsidy at taxpayers cost and the $500 hand out should be tied to Dental, Optical or similar, as it is it often goes to Pokies, TAB, Pubs or Clubs.
  Long term unemployment benefits should be capped with no rent subsidy followed by at least six months of national service to learn to work.

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

• des:

  10 Oct 2008 11:56:36am

  women on gold coast winging270 dollors pen. cannot exist? addrent allowance tele . elect .+500dollars plus qrter all. plus herage group never almost never worked stop gambling use building soc not banks i dont spend aprox 100 dollors per pen do my own cooking and have aprox 1200 dollors in account and have nothing but contempt for illetrate wingers grow up monski

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

• James:

  10 Oct 2008 12:11:37pm

  Kevin Rudd advises that $10 a week for pensioners costs 8 billion dollars across the forward estimates.
  
  When will a respected journalist or the Opposition start asking Kevin Rudd about the cuts he will make across the forward estimates to pay hopefully a lot more than $10 a week to pensioners?
  
  By all accounts Kevin Rudd is a foward thinker with a plan. If this is true he already knows the areas where he is going to make the cuts or increase taxes.
  
  Kevin Rudd only tells us half of his intentions. It is about time he fessed up to the other half. Then Australians will have time to digest Kevin Rudd's reality and not be subjected to more and more spin.

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • Doh:

    10 Oct 2008 12:55:48pm

    If he was asked the response would be
    1. This government has always said ...
    2. That's why ...
    3. The important thing therefore is ...
    
    ...all totally ignoring the question. I don't enjoy listening to politicians at the best of times but Mr Rudd is one of the few who inspire me to immediately look for something else to do.

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

• Peter O:

  10 Oct 2008 12:38:49pm

  Single pensioners, I am one, and I don't drink,smoke or gamble and own my home and I manage quite well.
  
  My concession card is worth several hundred dollars a year.

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

• Peter D:

  10 Oct 2008 12:46:43pm

  Magoo says he will live on Pal until he gets his pension rise. But Magoo Pal is one of the most expensive brands you can buy. If you must indulge in such stupid sensationalism you could at least buy the home brand stuff. More whingers.............

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

• jaygee:

  10 Oct 2008 12:57:18pm

  In response to some previous comments I would say - Ben, by the time some baby boomers retire in the 2020s many of todays pensioners will be long gone! To Kev - if you eat Pal then you lack imagination in feeding yourself properly. To 1936 Aussie - you insult the majority of pensioners by suggesting they are wasting their money on all forms of gambling. I'm sure that there are many other welfare recipients who waste money on gambling, drugs & entertainment etc. As a pensioner I am grateful for what I receive & any discounts offered. We manage reasonably with not too many frills but have lived thru" quite a few recessions "we had to have".

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • 1936 Aussie:

    10 Oct 2008 2:23:58pm

    jaygee, you are one of very few that see no evil in gambling, open your eyes next time you walk through a pub or club, ask yourself why estate agents are always trying to get on councils, as for honest councils, perhaps you will suggest Woolongong, and Banks do not rip off their customers. Must be your Dreamtime?

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

• whitelephant:

  10 Oct 2008 12:58:59pm

  I wonder -just thinking-just perhaps-if we didn't make silly purchases like joint strike fighters and submarines then pensioners could have a raise.
  No - silly me-there are all those hordes frothing at the mouth waiting to invade (if they can afford to given the current world economic meltdown).
  But they unlike us are fanatics aren't they?-they could take us over with their bare hands couldn't they.
  Sorry- I realise now that the JSF etc is necessary.
  I'll wash my mouth out with soap.

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

• Mark:

  10 Oct 2008 12:59:15pm

  ...and when will they get it right for the solar rebate?
  
  It's a ludicrous thing to have introduced the means test, removing an incentive to do something good for the environment from so many people.
  
  Come on Rudd and Garrett, everyone deserves to be supported in going solar, fix things before it's too late and scrap the means test!

  Agree (1) Alert moderator

• ChuckNorris:

  10 Oct 2008 1:02:27pm

  Yawn.. the pensioners generation stuff the planet up for us young people.. they should get no increase IMO! stop pandering to them Rudd most of the vote Liberal anyways :)

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

• spud:

  10 Oct 2008 1:09:46pm

  I agree. Pensioners should be the highest priority for this government. Forget particularly all those who were stupid enough to save for their own retirement and are now getting belted by the meltdown. In fact, why not tax them for their prudence and give the proceeds to pensioners?
  
  Oh I forgot, that is what raising the pension in the present circumstances is doing anyway. Just shows, Rudd is a genius by comparison to those who voted for him.

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

• John Herring:

  10 Oct 2008 1:13:29pm

  Will it just be aged pensioners or will the disability pensioners get some relief as well, my bet is only the aged will receive a boost.

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

• Vote 1 for Pensioners:

  10 Oct 2008 1:17:29pm

  Can't wait for this Carbon Tax to come in.......should supplement some areas with the additional funds they stole errr make. Like spend it on the financial sector with Aussie Bailout plans for banks with our super....goodie goodie.....(rubs hands together)....wonder what the value in the Chinese housing market is , can Aussies live in China?, well spose Kev has proven we can, hardly seem him at home...wait on, he's off again, oi Kev!.....I'M COMING KEV, WAIT UP!......

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

• Peter D:

  10 Oct 2008 1:18:17pm

  Really, people do go on with the most unmitigated tripe sometimes. Usually the people who whinge and moan about money are the ones who really don't need to. Here's an example. I work for A Government organisation, its duty is to raise public funds. I had a lady call me one day saying she could not pay her account. In order to assist, I did a bit of investigation. It turns out that this woman OWNS a block of flats in St Kilda, a block of flats in Balaclava and 2 shops in Elsternwick. When I asked her what reason she had for not paying, she said she was calling me from her holiday apartment on the Gold Coast and could not possibly come in and discuss her problem. The amount she owed??? $586. REALLY

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

• patrick:

  10 Oct 2008 1:28:12pm

  Why dont Labor step aside now, as they dont know how the economy or anything else for that matter works.
  
  Why do pensioners have to wait, until the next budget.
  
  Obviously this big talking bag of wind and his mates just wouldnt have a clue.
  
  Grey Power will make a very Big change at the next election, so why dosent he throw in the towel and save this country money

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • Remark:

    10 Oct 2008 2:25:45pm

    Do you know what would have happened to the pension if the Liberals had won the last election?
    
    It would have gone down!
    
    The Liberals based the pension as a set percentage of male average earnings. Then they set about ~cutting~ workers' earnings with WorkChoices.
    
    They were set to make WorkChoices even more drastic, thus cutting wages more drastically, resulting in proportionate reductions to the pension.
    
    

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

• Smee:

  10 Oct 2008 1:33:29pm

  And, meanwhile, the members of the federal parliament continue to skim the public purse, to line their own pockets, while the pensioners who can afford to buy it, have to live on dog food.
  
  I wonder what the members of the federal parliament would do, if the only food available to the members of the parliament, in their luxurious facilities, was dog food.
  
  Or, even better,if the paymaster for the members of the federal parliament, started paying the federal members of parliament, no more than the single pension, and, stopped all the perks (commonly known as rorts).
  
  Perhaps, then, the members of the federal parliament might wake up, and start actually working for their money for a change.
  
  

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

• Brian:

  10 Oct 2008 1:35:38pm

  Maybe pensioners should have an AP(Age Pension) license with restrictions, no smokes, no Pokies etc. Similar to a Driving license, that has many restrictions and you pay if you break them. Migrants should be assessed by percentage to years contributing to the Australian Economy. Wife and i have contributed 55yrs, the migrant next door only 5yrs, our kids and our g/kids all contribute as time goes by, they are educated into the economy and not to be on the dole. So on simple maths tells us hard working born and bred Australians are made to beg at the expense of the good life for the clipons who runaway from there own countries woes.
  Maybe some of us could be sponsored be these Bank, Financial and Corporate CEO's that take absolute golden parachutes out of organisations that we managed to tuck a little of our savings into, while they lived the high life and ratted it.
  And dont forget the Billions your going to pay for warfare items, like planes to protect your pittance.
  We could be indexed to the Pollies and get the same perks, then we could visit our kids and grandkids around this great nation while they are working their butts off paying their mortgages.

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

• john:

  10 Oct 2008 1:42:52pm

  I think this country is in real trouble.
  Look at some of these unsympathetic stupid comments made by obviously selfish young people who have no regard for the people who built this country with their hard work.
  I have worked for 45 years and have never claimed unemployment benefits, or Austudy, or whatever, and have paid taxes all the way. Now I am nearing retirement , the least I can expect, is to be adequately looked after by the nation that I helped build and fund for all these years!

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • scattered:

    10 Oct 2008 2:13:28pm

    In the '80s I was earning twice average earnings and paying 60% marginal tax. Now I'm on disability pension, don't get the bonuses paid to age pensioners and carers, just had the rent go up so there goes the new utilities payment, and everything else has gone up heaps too.
    As far as Internet access goes, I trade having a mobile for that. Not eating dog food, but I manage because I have a credit card to cover the bills when they come in. Remember that pensioner and welfare money goes right back into the economy.
    I do think pension should be means tested, there's many with huge asset value taking the age pension because of lax eligibility standards.

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • oberserver:

    10 Oct 2008 2:25:21pm

    Not to diminish your sense of entitlement here but many of the remarks are the most well informed and carefully thought out I have seen in some time. It is not about being stingy as you seem to imply (by the way: there is no need to go for the emotional cheap shot) but about responsible, sustainable measures that do not brankrupt this country.
    
    By 2020 there will be significantly more pensioners for an ever decreasing tax base to support.
    
    You claim to love the country you built but you seem to not care if it can survive beyond your own immediate desires. I for one am glad that this is being approached with thought and care. The future generations you so arrogantly dismish as selfish and who have no regard must inherit and bear the weight of your indulgent attitude. I think it more than reasonable that they ask: how best to do this?

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

• JJ:

  10 Oct 2008 1:56:52pm

  So it seems K Rudd has the pensioners' best interests at heart, to improve their dietary habits, depriving them of the money which they would only otherwise waste on alcohol, tobacco, etc etc...
  And after all, it's not like they're financially contributing to K Rudd's taxes - the elderly are obviously a burden on the tax-payers of society.
  There's more than one way to skin a cat as K Rudd seems to have realised - you don't need to enact legislation in favour of euthansia when you can starve the old buggers to death instead.
  As for the rising cost of living? It's not K Rudd's fault they were too remiss not to buy their own home and grow a veggie plot to sustain themself, so why should K Rudd have to re-allocate tax-dollars far better spent on overseas "fact finding" and "relationship building" exercises to feeding and housing people who probably wouldn't vote for him anyway???

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • oberserver:

    10 Oct 2008 2:27:17pm

    Melodrama and theatrics assist no one here. If you prefer that sort of thing feel free to vote for it next election. I prefer cooler heads to do the thinking about national sustainability in a volatile financial environement - but hey... that's just me.

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

• AJ:

  10 Oct 2008 2:04:01pm

  A year is a long time to wait for a lousy $520/year increase when you're already stretched. And don't forget this is the aged pension, not other pensions where ability permitting you can work. We're talking about people who can do nothing else to support themselves and give their budgets some relief.

  Agree (0) Alert moderator