Labor ought to stop pandering to millionaires on pensions

Once Labor and the unions stood up for battlers. Now they're robocalling seeking sympathy for millionaires who want to stay on the pension.

From the end of this week 91,000 extremely wealthy pensioners will be kicked off a payment that was meant to be directed to those in the most need. They'll lose an average of $5000 per year each. As a consolation, they'll get to keep the far more valuable Seniors Health Card, entitling them to discounted medicine under the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, easier access to the Medicare Safety Net and rewards for doctors who bulk-bill them.

Some are complaining they might not continue to get a discount on council rates. Another 236,000 exceedingly well-off pensioners will get less of a pension, an average of $3400 per year less.

Astonishingly, at the moment it's possible for a couple to own a home (of whatever value) and investments of $1.15 million and still get a part pension. Couples who don't own their home can hold investments worth $1.3 million. The changes, from January 1, will cut those thresholds to $823,000 and $1.03 million.

What's being taken away is relatively new. In 2007 John Howard had a rush of blood to the head. Fearing he was about to lose office, facing a surplus that approached $20 billion, and believing the mining boom would last forever, he declared Christmas in July. On June 30 he posted nearly every senior citizen in the country a cheque for $500. On July 1 he made most super payouts tax free, and on September 20 he cut the pension assets test taper rate from $3 to $1.50 per fortnight.

This meant that instead of losing $3 of pension per fortnight for every $1000 in assets they owned over the full pension threshold, retirees lost $1.50. They could own twice as much over the threshold as before and still get a part pension. The change to the taper rate cost $1 billion per year and created a new generation of entitled wealthy pensioners.

more :

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/labor-ought-to-stop-pandering-to-millionaires-on-p...

Greens pandering to the rich, attacking pensioners.

Dustgusting mongrels!

Redmond Neck wrote on Jan 1^st, 2017 at 10:23am:


you mean the greens are pandering to the libs

Redmond Neck wrote on Jan 1^st, 2017 at 10:33am:


of course, I didn't see it before

with all the talk of a split in the greens and a split in the libs, this new party could be a major contender with both Bernardi and hanson dumb  as leader and deputy

Quote:


Quote:



Under the new rules a single pensioner has pension reductions start if they have $250,000 and they lose their pension if they have a bit over $500K

At $500K it is very likely that the ex pensioner will have less draw down income than a pension.

To claim that these people are millionaires is dishonest.

A pensioner is “deemed” to get a return that is impossible to get now. The deeming rate should have been reduced.

To some $500K may look huge, but spread over 20-30 years of retirement it isn’t.

We are not paying a full pension in any case to these people.

Meantime, in 2015/16 $30billion dollars got spent on super tax concessions, going mostly to the top 10%. A well known business figure is on like $2m a year income from a SMSF and pays no tax on that income.

STUPID move!