I am struggling to justify saving for retirement.

If I do the right thing and save vigilantly. My wife and I should have a retirement income of 50-55k. And because we will be over the assets threshold, we don't get a cent from the government.

However, if I spend it all, I can have a pension of 37K.

So why should I bother to be a self-funded retiree, when I only get marginally more income than the pension will give me.

Granted, that extra 13-18k allows me to have some nice extras.  But if I make sure, I have a new car, new appliances, etc, before I retire, I will have the nice things for most of our retirement.

As a middle income earner, are there any reasons to try and self-fund retirement?  Or should I retire early, spend my money and grab the pension?

There seems to be very little incentive to avoid social welfare in retirement unless you are very wealthy.

Zaddo wrote on May 16^th, 2019 at 11:42am:


You do understand that as you draw down on your assets you become eligible for the pension?

Zaddo wrote on May 16^th, 2019 at 12:11pm:


That depends on your drawdown rate.

Need a new car? Modifications to your house for when you get older?

Jasin wrote on May 16^th, 2019 at 12:15pm:



The gold coast is filled with seniors.  Their kids from down south visit regularly.  Their elderly parents generally buy bigger than they need in order to accommodate their kids and grandkids

South east Queensland is a short hop by plane from Melbourne and Sydney.  Central Coast NSW is an even shorter hop or drive and the Central Coast also attracts lots of seniors

People don't usually want to move overseas when older because it means they'll see less of their kids and grandkids (and other considerations such as medical care, security, etc.)

When I lived on the coast I used to shake my head when new arrivals said they hadn't wanted to move further afield because they wanted to remain close to their kids/grandkids

when you get older, you understand why.  Sure, moving to where your money stretches further sounds attractive.  But not when it means you've spent most of your adult life close to your children, only to up and leave them -- for good in many instances -- because life is cheaper in a foreign land

Valkie wrote on May 16^th, 2019 at 3:15pm:


Eloquently put  and exactly how I feel!!

Frack the grubberment, if you have a lot they take nothing, if you have a little, they take half, if you have nothing, they give you everything. 

Zaddo wrote on May 16^th, 2019 at 4:02pm:



Let's face it.  What do you need in retirement?  A warm bed, under a roof, a fridge, capacity to buy food, have access to decent health support...and Bob's yer Uncle.

Aussie wrote on May 16^th, 2019 at 4:16pm:


Bobby will go to sleep with a smile on his dial tonight ..


You are right Aus, food a bed, what more do you need ?

Bias_2012 wrote on May 16^th, 2019 at 5:40pm:



at the end of the day  ....if you live long enough to end in agedcare.. you have done pretty well...

not everyone gets to be OLD...we wear out its no ones fault  my only wish Is I am not a burden to my family...I want to go quick.......but then who doesnt!

cods wrote on May 16^th, 2019 at 5:45pm:



If you haven't voted, why not give the Voluntary Euthanasia party a hand up

BigP wrote on May 16^th, 2019 at 4:05pm:



After he is elected, the Bill Shorten government is going to pass legislation authorising unannounced inspections of all bank  safe deposit boxes.

LOL.

Don't believe me ?

It isn't altogether outside the realms of what is possible today.   !!!




If we give socialist politicians total, unencumbered authority ['to help everyone' fairly], those socialist politicians will eventually enact all kinds of measures to enable them to pretend to 'do the right thing'.

In just the last 100 years, look at what type of behaviour, a myriad of authoritarian governments, all over the world have stooped to, in order to 'make a better world'.

There is no depravity, or atrocity, that an authoritarian government will not stoop to, in order to enable it, to 'do the right thing' in the interests of the nation.
/sarc off



Omar al-Bashir [Sudan].

Mugabe.

Erdogan.

....lots, lots more.     ....n.b. some of those leaders intially came to power, having gained the trust of their people.
!!!!!


n.b.
Yadda is on a full pension, and does not have any safe deposit boxes.



.



Psalms 84:12
O LORD of hosts, blessed is the man that trusteth in thee.


Psalms 118:8
It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man.


Psalms 146:3
Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man....


Proverbs 29:25
The fear of man bringeth a snare: but whoso putteth his trust in the LORD shall be safe.


Jeremiah 17:5
Thus saith the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the LORD.


Jeremiah 17:7
Blessed is the man that trusteth in the LORD, and whose hope the LORD is.

scurt wrote on May 16^th, 2019 at 7:07pm:



i just love how all the Ostriches with their heads up their arse think $5B a year and growing fast (predicted to reach $50b by 2030 if left unchanged) think they're not a burden to society 

BigP wrote on May 16^th, 2019 at 4:05pm:


You can't spend, live in or eat precious metals.

AaronCRescue wrote on May 16^th, 2019 at 4:18pm:


65+ if you live that long?

Geesus when do you think people should retire?

Rudd put the retirement age up to 67 depending on the year you were born.

My pension eligibility is now 66.5 and I was born 1956.

The fargin LNP want to put it up to 70 with an extra emphasis that the pension won't be there for younger Australians when they get to retirement.

And both the 2 majors want to get their hands on our superannuation by changing the rules or shifting the goal posts.

In addition the talk of the reintroduction of death and inheritance taxes.

A true indication that they are bloodsucking swine determined to keep people down and under their control.

They have no rights to a share of those personal assets which have been paid for with money already taxed over a lifetime.

That politicians are even considering and talking about this proves  to what depths of low they are prepared to stoop to.

John Smith wrote on May 16^th, 2019 at 7:42pm:


Your attitude towards pensioners/ the pension would be all well and good if both sides of
Politics left the monetary and material assets of self funded retirees alone.

People being able to adequately support themselves in retirement is an asset to the govt.

When they change rules and reduce their income/Capitol which then qualifies them for a pension or part there of defeats the purpose.

Bobby. wrote on May 16^th, 2019 at 9:04pm:



Yes.And that is why people have superannuation and can add to it.

They can retire at any time. They just don't qualify for a pension. And that has always been the case.

Valkie wrote on May 17^th, 2019 at 5:17am:


Have you checked the current eligibility to get the Age Pension? I can't post links but Google "Age Pension" and check the Department of Human Services site.  You might be surprised about how much money/assets you can have and still be eligible. If you take your Super in a Pension, the Age Pension reduces. You have to be "over 65" though.

Check it out before you do anything rash, like spending all your money so that you can get the Age Pension. 

You can probably retire "tomorrow" and still get the Age Pension in a few years time. Your home isn't included in the assets. 

Valkie wrote on May 17^th, 2019 at 5:17am:


It is reassuring to hear that others are equally pissed off about how the "grubberment" treats hard working tax payers. 

It blows my mind why they keep looking for ways to take a bigger slice of our hard earned money.  I have never got a cent from those bastards for unemployment, family benefits, or any other handout.

They should be giving incentives to become a self funded retiree. 

As you say, what we have saved should be the icing on the cake.  I don't mind if the cake they give us is a bit smaller than someone that hasn't been fortunate enough to save for their retirement. But to make the cutoff for any pension benefits so low, is a huge disincentive to try and be self funded in retirement.

scurt wrote on May 17^th, 2019 at 8:46am:



only a true idiot would think a pensioner contributed nothing to society.

Zaddo wrote on May 17^th, 2019 at 4:17pm:



they do/did!

Captain Caveman wrote on May 17^th, 2019 at 5:09pm:




This one springs to mind.
How utterly absurd.

https://tenplay.com.au/news/national/july/the-young-pollie-getting-a-whopping-pa...

AaronCRescue wrote on May 17^th, 2019 at 8:30am:


The fact is that I was going to work and continue contributing to my super and retire not being a burden on the Australian people.

But I have been screwed once too often.
I will finish my contract next year, not sign a new one and simply retire on a comfortable income running down my savings until I'm eligible for my pension.

It will be a great few years, lots of spending, a trip or two overseas and a couple of laps of Australia.
Then I'll just settle down and write complaining letters to who ever is in parliament.
Begging for more cash, benefits, extras etc.
I will go to council meetings and be the right royal pain in the arse to each counsellor.
I'll have fun bugger#$%g up public servants days and enjoy every day as it comes.

We have politicians who have given themselves obscene benefits and pensions
We have senior kleptocrat public servants doing everything in their power to get more, do less and screw people.

I'm too old to fight any more.
I'm just going to become what I've always hated, a parasite.
I will enjoy my money to excess, and then live off the Australian taxpayer.

Bobby. wrote on May 17^th, 2019 at 6:41pm:


What?
Are you advocating lying and keeping money away from centafink assessors?
How can the refuse people if they
lie...like the grubberment
Cheat.....like the grubberment
Fiddle and adjust......like the grubberment

A guy I used to know developed severe arthritis
He could not work at his trade, but centafink said he had too much in his super and bank to be eligable for the disabled pension.

He knew, as he got older, that he would need cash for operations and medication, so he set out to divest himself of his finances.

Lo and behold, he suddenly developed a gambling addiction and a proclivity for prostitutes.

Suddenly, thousands was being withdrawn from his account to be spent on his addictions.

When he had divested sufficient, he signed up for help with his addictions and promptly fronted up to centafink to get his disability pension.
The demanded to know where his money was.
He showed them his sign up for addiction treatment stating that he was so depressed he just couldn't help himself.
He also stated that stress could easily push him over the edge again and if it was because he was harassed by centafink, he would sue them.

He got his DP
That was several years ago.
His arthritis has gotten much worse, his DP does not meet his medication or treatment needs, but a helpful anonymous stranger keeps giving him the money he needs when he needs it, isn't that great?

Our grubberment needs a serious wake up call.
Preferably with the aid of GUILLOTINE and stakes.

But, it is possible to play the system.
Politicians, multinationals, rich and criminals do it all the time.
It's only the honest that suffer.

Re Valkie

Well, at least take comfort in that you still can have a pension, medicare, and government funded aged care placements just in case.   Younger people of today, will continue to work hard, contribute, and probably not able to enjoy them when they retire.

AaronCRescue wrote on May 17^th, 2019 at 8:30am:


Your home isn't included at the moment... but that can change with a stroke of the pen.

As for being 65 to get the pension..... there isn't anyone younger that myself that will qualify anymore. They will all have to go to 67.  I'm 63 and don't qualify until I'm 66 & 6 months. My sister is 3 years older than me, born 1953 and she was 65 & 6 months before she qualified.

Mortdooley wrote on May 23^rd, 2019 at 11:32pm:


Pretty much, except there is a sliding scale. You have the pension reduced by an amount per so many dollars that the person is above the asset limit set for the full pension. So it is possible to receive a part-pension up to a certain amount of assets held.

You should be like my Italian friends.

Work as much as possible for cash.
use cash (carefully) to build a huge house, way too big for what you would ever need.
When you need some money , you sell huge house and buy another not quite so huge house and spend the $ difference.
Plus spend that cash you have buried in the garden,,, still get a full pension.

So, do you have a Death tax? It seems if relatives leave you too much money it could also affect your benefits.

Quote:


A few people I know are doing that deliberately - retiring early and living off their super until they reach pension age and then applying for the pension.

In fact, I'm planning to do exactly that myself at the end of this financial year. I'm 62 in August and I can't get the pension until I'm 67 - thank you, government.

I intend to finish work and live off my super for 5 years and then apply for the pension when I'm 67. I've thought about leaving it for another year or two but I'm concerned that the scumbag pollies will change the super rules (again) and I'll end up not being able to access my super until 65 or 66.

And besides, there is NO WAY my back and knees, etc. are going to last until I'm 67 if I keep working.

Valkie wrote on May 24^th, 2019 at 5:45am:


Tanya Plebersick spent $277,000 from October to December 2018. is she a parasite too?

Oh and don't get me started on the high paid pensions of politicians & the free ride they get for life.

Laugh till you cry wrote on May 25^th, 2019 at 12:04pm:



Quote:


Debatable. I would be happy enough to run the experiment to find out if it is true

[quote author=carlsd link=1557970979/54#54 date=1558739370][quote]They can't retire at any time unless they have enough in their super. And if they go early I'll bet they run out and end up on the pension anyway.[/quote]

A few people I know are doing that deliberately - retiring early and living off their super until they reach pension age and then applying for the pension.

In fact, I'm planning to do exactly that myself at the end of this financial year. I'm 62 in August and I can't get the pension until I'm 67 - thank you, government.

I intend to finish work and live off my super for 5 years and then apply for the pension when I'm 67. I've thought about leaving it for another year or two but I'm concerned that the scumbag pollies will change the super rules (again) and I'll end up not being able to access my super until 65 or 66.

And besides, there is NO WAY my back and knees, etc. are going to last until I'm 67 if I keep working.[/quote]

My plan exactly.
I intend to see Australia by caravan and then retire comfortably when I finish, around 5 to 10 years later.
Screw the politicians and their plans to make me pay my own way.
I have been paying my own way for the last 47 years.
Now they can pay me, just as soon as my super savings get to the point I can claim the pension.

Dnarever wrote on May 25^th, 2019 at 12:18pm:



Politicians don't eat.

They suck blood

All the blood they can, bloody parasites they all are.

But remember, they are only the tip of the iceberg
Senior public servants and kleptocrats get the same deal

We are paying for tens of thousands of these parasites.......for life.

AaronCRescue wrote on May 16^th, 2019 at 4:18pm:


One thing I definitely don't want to be is one of those croaky voice geriatrics' who seem to appear in every retirement village ad and when asked what they love about where they live their answer is " The Sunday Roast"!

What a horrible way to live out your twilight years - you worked your butt off for 50+ years and all you have to look forward to is a meal of mushy veggies and dry meat once a week!

minarchist wrote on May 26^th, 2019 at 9:39pm:



You have to sell your house to get into one
of those old peoples homes and
then they give you $3 per day of food.

There is also a kerosene bath waiting for you if you have scabies from their rotten infected bed linen.

https://www.theage.com.au/national/kerosene-bath-nurses-banned-20020329-gdu35d.h...

Lisa Jones wrote on May 26^th, 2019 at 9:53pm:


sort of , but those who have a good
"old age" are those who learnt the lessons of success early.

you have to give first to recieve.
you have to give "positive emotions'

if you are a taker, a value leech, if , when your kids come to see you, you moan and complain and whine (like a trade unionist or a welfare recipient), then those kids will feel a mild disgust and they will stop coming.
now you are in a downward spiral.

the person who is a member of a bush fire brigade, a CWA, a shooting or fishing club, the SES, is a giver and the world will respond well.

a person who just likes to value leech off the government is a taker and when you are a taker, you may well die alone and in an unhappy state.

never take a dollar you didnt earn, train your brain to only express positive emotions...thats worth a lot more then any share portfolio