Pensioners are forking out more and more for food, health and transport, and statistics show that these are rising faster than inflation. :(

The pensioner and beneficiary living cost index (PBLCI) rose by 1.9 per cent in the March quarter, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) - that's 0.3 per cent higher than the consumer price index (CPI).

The biggest jumps were in health costs (up by 6.7 per cent), education (5.5 per cent), transport (3.6 per cent) and food (3.3 per cent).


Only clothing and household contents and services were a bit cheaper, going down by 1.1 per cent and 1.3 per cent respectively.

The quarterly figures were part of a bigger trend, with the PBLCI rising by 4.6 per cent in the 12 months prior to March 31, much higher than the CPI's 3.3 per cent.

National Seniors CEO Michael O'Neill said all governments needed to work together to make life easier for pensioners.

"These commodity items are clearly necessities - not something that older Australians can cut back on," Mr O'Neill said in a statement on Monday.

"Today's ABS figures confirm the pressure pensioners and older Australians on fixed incomes are feeling at the moment, and it's not going to get any easier."   :(

Mr O'Neill referred to a 2009 study which showed that one in every 10 Australians aged 55 and over had to sell belongings or take out a loan to cope with rising living expenses.   :(

With electricity prices on the rise, more people will be forced to chew into their savings and make difficult choices about what they can and can't afford, Mr O'Neill said.   :(

He urged governments to provide some quick relief.

Im waiting for you to blame the Libs for this.

Liberal and Labor both said that electricity would get cheaper once it was privatised. They both lied. Too late now.

If Howard didn't change the pension rises from the Average Weeky Wage to the CPI penisoners would be over $100 p/f better off.

So yeah I will blame Howard.

The average weeky wage rises worked good enough for 25 years since Whitlam brought it in, so way did Howard change it.

wrote on May 17^th, 2011 at 9:14am:

If Howard didn't change the pension rises from the Average Weeky Wage to the CPI penisoners would be over $100 p/f better off. So yeah I will blame Howard. The average weeky wage rises worked good enough for 25 years since Whitlam brought it in, so way did Howard change it.

Because it was much easier to deny pensioners and the
unemployed a fair and decent payment rate on CPI indexation
rather than on AWW indexation.

No other reason.

Kat wrote on May 17^th, 2011 at 11:12am:

wrote on May 17th, 2011 at 9:14am: If Howard didn't change the pension rises from the Average Weeky Wage to the CPI penisoners would be over $100 p/f better off. So yeah I will blame Howard. The average weeky wage rises worked good enough for 25 years since Whitlam brought it in, so way did Howard change it. Because it was much easier to deny pensioners and the unemployed a fair and decent payment rate on CPI indexation rather than on AWW indexation. No other reason.

I have put this on heaps of threads but all the liberals won't come on and defend what Howard done, that is how weak the liberals on here are ,they don't like the truth throwing up to them.

They must think if they don't answer a thread it must of not happen.

Howard hasn't been PM for 4 years now - get over it.

wrote on May 17^th, 2011 at 11:27am:

Kat wrote on May 17th, 2011 at 11:12am: wrote on May 17th, 2011 at 9:14am: If Howard didn't change the pension rises from the Average Weeky Wage to the CPI penisoners would be over $100 p/f better off. So yeah I will blame Howard. The average weeky wage rises worked good enough for 25 years since Whitlam brought it in, so way did Howard change it. Because it was much easier to deny pensioners and the unemployed a fair and decent payment rate on CPI indexation rather than on AWW indexation. No other reason. I have put this on heaps of threads but all the liberals won't come on and defend what Howard done, that is how weak the liberals on here are ,they don't like the truth throwing up to them. They must think if they don't answer a thread it must of not happen.

I would like to see a link to that wattle..

as the only thing I remember that Howard did was pensioners bonus'.. however I am sure nothing was done for the unemployed..tell me Kat do the unemployed get benefits from medical or are they expected to pay full price?..

never collected unemployment so its all a mystery to me.. its all very well complaining  about what govts  DONT do however they do do something sometimes...it always remains to be seen if it works..

how many unemployed are homeless for instance.. if most live at home then they are not doing so badly.. how many are prepared to do just about anything ???. if your an accountant its tricky I know but you should still be prepared to work outside the box.. and if that means checkout chick so be it. its a job..someone has to do it.

we are developing a welfare state  of mind,we are also being very choosy about where and what we do..if the govts dares suggest you travel or god forbid move.. some have apoplexy.

a friend of mine is an engineer.. a young lady to boot and she has travelled all over the country getting different jobs....she wants to go further she has to move.. jobs dont come to you you know?

cods wrote on May 17^th, 2011 at 11:42am:

wrote on May 17th, 2011 at 11:27am: Kat wrote on May 17th, 2011 at 11:12am: wrote on May 17th, 2011 at 9:14am: If Howard didn't change the pension rises from the Average Weeky Wage to the CPI penisoners would be over $100 p/f better off. So yeah I will blame Howard. The average weeky wage rises worked good enough for 25 years since Whitlam brought it in, so way did Howard change it. Because it was much easier to deny pensioners and the unemployed a fair and decent payment rate on CPI indexation rather than on AWW indexation. No other reason. I have put this on heaps of threads but all the liberals won't come on and defend what Howard done, that is how weak the liberals on here are ,they don't like the truth throwing up to them. They must think if they don't answer a thread it must of not happen. I would like to see a link to that wattle.. as the only thing I remember that Howard did was pensioners bonus'.. however I am sure nothing was done for the unemployed..tell me Kat do the unemployed get benefits from medical or are they expected to pay full price?.. never collected unemployment so its all a mystery to me.. its all very well complaining  about what govts  DONT do however they do do something sometimes...it always remains to be seen if it works.. how many unemployed are homeless for instance.. if most live at home then they are not doing so badly.. how many are prepared to do just about anything ???. if your an accountant its tricky I know but you should still be prepared to work outside the box.. and if that means checkout chick so be it. its a job..someone has to do it. we are developing a welfare state  of mind,we are also being very choosy about where and what we do..if the govts dares suggest you travel or god forbid move.. some have apoplexy. a friend of mine is an engineer.. a young lady to boot and she has travelled all over the country getting different jobs....she wants to go further she has to move.. jobs dont come to you you know?

I'm unaware of the current deal, but it used to be that you got
BASIC medical, eye exams and a few fripperies, and some, but  
by no means all, of the PBS benefits. Much is charged at full price.
There are no reductions in consultation fees etc, and, with few
doctors bulk-billing these days, a simple visit to the doctor can
mean the difference between eating or not eating for up to a
week, depending on other commitments.

Nice that they decided to give POW's an extra $500 per fortnight...after they are all but gone! Lest We Forget.

I have put this on heaps of threads but all the liberals won't come on and defend what Howard done, that is how weak the liberals on here are ,they don't like the truth throwing up to them.

They must think if they don't answer a thread it must of not happen.





I would like to see a link to that wattle

Astroboy wrote on May 17^th, 2011 at 12:58pm:

Nice that they decided to give POW's an extra $500 per fortnight...after they are all but gone! Lest We Forget.

yes sounds a good one...when they say extra... what sort of pension have the been getting.??

The way Governments and centrelink treat the Pensioners is a disgrace and inhumane, they have no shame.  The people of Australia demand pension parity with the minimum wage, while the unemployed require incentive to get back into work...keeping Pensions so low for people who have no options is cruel and unusual punishment. :(

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on May 17^th, 2011 at 9:10am:

Liberal and Labor both said that electricity would get cheaper once it was privatised. They both lied. Too late now.

Add in a carbon tax and do you think it will get cheaper then?

Hands up for the carbon tax again.....

Prevailing wrote on May 20^th, 2011 at 1:25pm:

The way Governments and centrelink treat the Pensioners is a disgrace and inhumane, they have no shame.  The people of Australia demand pension parity with the minimum wage, while the unemployed require incentive to get back into work...keeping Pensions so low for people who have no options is cruel and unusual punishment. :(

Centrelink do not decide the pension rate thresholds. Govt. does that.  

If Howard didn't change the pension rises from the Average Weeky Wage to the CPI penisoners would be over $100 p/f better off.

So yeah I will blame Howard.

The average weeky wage rises worked good enough for 25 years since Whitlam brought it in, so way did Howard change it.

I was not aware that Howard changed the indexation, but it was Howard who brought in the taxfree super for the high recipients of super, but it was the Hawke-Keating government which introduced compulsory super, and this is the result:
The age pension costs the government $25billion and the tax concessions cost the same; 25billion.
A person who can salary sacrifice the full amount for 30 years, will save more on tax concessions than he/she would get in age pension, living up to 85 or more years.

This are the tax savings for a person who can use the maximum super contributions if under 50 Years of age.
Concessional contribution at 30.June 2010
$25,000 *0.465=$11,625
$25,000*0.15=3,750 Tax saving= $11,625-$3,750=$7,875
$450,000 in super fund
$450,000*.06=$27,000 Interest
$27,000*0.465=$12,555
$27,000*0.15=$4,050 Tax saving $12,555-$4050=$8,505
Total tax saved = $8505+$7875=$16,380 for this year.

If the person is over 50 contribution is as follow.
$50,000*0.465%=$23,250
$50,000*0.15=$7,500 Tax saved= $23,250-$7,500=$15,750
Total Tax saved==$15,750+$8505=$24,255 This is well above the age pension

As the persons super balance can exceed the $500,000 limit for the over 50’s the contribution drops to $25,000, but the person contributes $450,000 non concessional into the fund so that the fund now holds $900,000

$900,000*0.06=$54,000
Tax= $54,000*0.465=$25110
Tax= $54,000*0.15=$8100 Tax saved= $25110-$8,100=$17,010
Total tax saved=$17,010+$7875=$24,885

The tax savings for a person in this position will only increase further as the balance in their fund increases and therefore the income which is taxed at 15%. And when the person reaches the age of 60 and starts drawing down the super, there will be no tax obligation at all. Assume a fund balance of $2million*6% =$120,000 income completely tax-free and this is a very conservative approach by having super balance in a term deposit.

Yet Mr.Shorten is talking about a “sustainable social system” yet he has been challenged by the Australian Taxation Office for breaches of the contribution limit.
As the media always is bleating about the unfairness of the contributions limits, and people like myself are prevented from bringing this unfairness to the attention of the average people, it would be very appropriate to air this matter on your widely watched “four corner program”