Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think there is the notion that the individual has paid taxes their working life, and this is the benefit. Not so much the belief that those currently working are funding it, but yeah I get what you mean.
This, at the least is an idea... that isn't just "we are living longer so hey! work longer!" This work until 70 idea is a short sighted plan and doesn't really factor in variables, some of which that have been mentioned here.
I am not sure how many people, today - have enough in their super to withdraw, live off and then not need pension at some point. We're not really at that stage where workers have been able to put enough into super...
Exactly and if there is a crash like in the 90's a lot of it will disappear as happened to many people.
Well, depends on how much you enjoy your job, but philosophically, is a life of constant toil worth it? I think unless there's something to look forward to afterwards, doing a job you don't enjoy just to perpetuate the cycle seems rather pointless, unless the job is really helping people/meaningful in itself.
Honestly, I'd rather die young than spend 50 years slogging away.
Exactly and if there is a crash like in the 90's a lot of it will disappear as happened to many people.
Even the recent GFC, some of those took a hit
I remember the 90's recession clearly. Horrible times, and people were really hit for 6 - some took over a decade to recover, and some haven't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Postman
Well, depends on how much you enjoy your job, but philosophically, is a life of constant toil worth it? I think unless there's something to look forward to afterwards, doing a job you don't enjoy just to perpetuate the cycle seems rather pointless, unless the job is really helping people/meaningful in itself.
Honestly, I'd rather die young than spend 50 years slogging away.
I'd rather see plans of encouraging those post 65/67 into volunteer work (and yeah, get the pension) -- or consulting on an industry -- not always being forced out OR forced to keep working. I just think its simplistic, and doesn't fit all...as Cushla said, ageism is a BIG issue already.
I also wonder what message it sends to trades/labourers - why would you enter a profession you know that you won't be able to finish in....
I remember the 90's recession clearly. Horrible times, and people were really hit for 6 - some took over a decade to recover, and some haven't.
I'd rather see plans of encouraging those post 65/67 into volunteer work (and yeah, get the pension) -- or consulting on an industry -- not always being forced out OR forced to keep working. I just think its simplistic, and doesn't fit all...as Cushla said, ageism is a BIG issue already.
I also wonder what message it sends to trades/labourers - why would you enter a profession you know that you won't be able to finish in....
Yes, if they are able...I mean many people DO want to keep busy, even if not in a paid profession, after retirement or as long as they can, instead of just sitting home, or playing bowls or bridge or something all day. I think we should all have a 4 day working week with one day mandatory volunteering/community service personally.
I think there is the notion that the individual has paid taxes their working life, and this is the benefit. Not so much the belief that those currently working are funding it, but yeah I get what you mean.
But you don't pay taxes in order to fund your own retirement. You pay taxes to fund current consumption, the roads, hospitals, schools, and pensions of those who are retired. I appreciate the social contract of someone paying taxes and expecting to be looked after in retirement, but I don't accept that paying taxes somehow lessens the burden of future taxpayers in providing for an individuals retirement, nor does it create an obligation on them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by artemis agrotera
This, at the least is an idea... that isn't just "we are living longer so hey! work longer!" This work until 70 idea is a short sighted plan and doesn't really factor in variables, some of which that have been mentioned here.
But why not work longer? The majority of people are fit and able enough to continue working until they're 70. Certainly, I'd rather be 70 today than 50 a few decades ago when you were even money not to even make retirement age. That was working until the day you die. Where does the line get drawn, the median life expectancy continues to rise, does that mean we could have a funding obligation that extends out 30 or 35 years? Just think of the raw numbers for a moment. It basically takes the median taxpayer a whole year to provide the income to a retiree. So the kid coming out of university will be paying someone's pension until they are 50. It doesn't seem at all short sighted, fewer taxpayers and more retirees. You can't just shake the money tree.
Aside from that, people have the opportunity to save and provide at least partial funding for their own retirement. I'm not talking about millionaires but plenty of people on modest incomes manage to do it. Of course they're not the sorts who have to buy the latest flat panel TV once a year. For the life of me I can't imagine why anyone on the median wage or above would be considering becoming a pensioner.
Quote:
Originally Posted by artemis agrotera
I'd rather see plans of encouraging those post 65/67 into volunteer work (and yeah, get the pension)
So turn someone from a taxpayer into a welfare recepient while still "working"? What's the net change in revenue there for the govt? About $50k/year?
Quote:
Originally Posted by artemis agrotera
I also wonder what message it sends to trades/labourers - why would you enter a profession you know that you won't be able to finish in....
As I asked before, a tradie who knows they will be done by 50 doesn't really see much difference between a pension at 65 and one at 70. In any event, most people do not work as tradespeople, most work in cushy desk jobs.
I am directly affected by this, but are not all that worried. My mum and dad have been pushing it on me for decades that I will never get an aged pension, I have been topping up my super beyond the standard rate for years.
The thought of Catching a horrible disease like dementia worries me a lot more.
Although you can expect a lot of changes as to when you will be able to draw on your super as well. The present over generous system especially serving the rich is unsustainable.
But you don't pay taxes in order to fund your own retirement. You pay taxes to fund current consumption, the roads, hospitals, schools, and pensions of those who are retired. I appreciate the social contract of someone paying taxes and expecting to be looked after in retirement, but I don't accept that paying taxes somehow lessens the burden of future taxpayers in providing for an individuals retirement, nor does it create an obligation on them.
But why not work longer? The majority of people are fit and able enough to continue working until they're 70. Certainly, I'd rather be 70 today than 50 a few decades ago when you were even money not to even make retirement age. That was working until the day you die. Where does the line get drawn, the median life expectancy continues to rise, does that mean we could have a funding obligation that extends out 30 or 35 years? Just think of the raw numbers for a moment. It basically takes the median taxpayer a whole year to provide the income to a retiree. So the kid coming out of university will be paying someone's pension until they are 50. It doesn't seem at all short sighted, fewer taxpayers and more retirees. You can't just shake the money tree.
Aside from that, people have the opportunity to save and provide at least partial funding for their own retirement. I'm not talking about millionaires but plenty of people on modest incomes manage to do it. Of course they're not the sorts who have to buy the latest flat panel TV once a year. For the life of me I can't imagine why anyone on the median wage or above would be considering becoming a pensioner.
So turn someone from a taxpayer into a welfare recepient while still "working"? What's the net change in revenue there for the govt? About $50k/year?
As I asked before, a tradie who knows they will be done by 50 doesn't really see much difference between a pension at 65 and one at 70. In any event, most people do not work as tradespeople, most work in cushy desk jobs.
A considerable difference at that stage of life. Five years nearer to the grave for one. While some may find there work the key to their existence others certainly don't.
In fact why not decrease full time work at an earlier age to enable younger folk to get into position? Sounds very regressive to me.
You can be assured most those advocating such a stance are either in positions of power, as such others do the work for them or are unaffected by the proposed changes.
Life is so much more than work. A world ruled by bean counters never likely to be a joyous place.
Yes, if they are able...I mean many people DO want to keep busy, even if not in a paid profession, after retirement or as long as they can, instead of just sitting home, or playing bowls or bridge or something all day. I think we should all have a 4 day working week with one day mandatory volunteering/community service personally.
Who could live on four days though? Surely life outside of work could be more interesting than purely bowels or bridge? Or is it the closed nature of Australian society that can make life apparently so dull outside of work?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
