topic Re: Intergenerational Theft in Community Spirit

Intergenerational Theft

tall_bearded01 — Tue, 03 Feb 2015 00:51:58 GMT

Though the PM tried, and I must admit almost succeeded to regaining some credibility at his Press Council speech on Monday, in the end he simply couldn’t help himself by once again putting his foot right in it.

I classify it as a failed, a fail because of the answer given to the second to last question re his justification for targeting the most venerable – including aged pensions – with his austerity program; “Intergenerational theft”. That is, as he sees it, those of our elderly who didn’t save enough during their working lives so they can self-fund their own retirement, are stealing from their children, by demanding the Government fund an aged pension which is marginally above subsistence level.

So let me introduce the PM to these so called thieves.

They are the people who started work prior to the late 60’s, and are already in receipt of the pension or who will shorty qualify.

When they started work wages were low and prices were high, with wages for juniors and women doing the same work being even lower – often substantially so.

When they started work and for most of their working lives consumer prices for essentials, as a proportion of actual net income were significantly higher. That is, no cheap throw away Chinese shoes, clothing, electrical goods and the like. For instance, if you wanted a TV you either had to save for over a year to get one, or rent one, or take a chair to the local TV store and sit in front of the display window so you could watch your favourite program for free. Then of course if owned a TV or a radio you had to pay for a licence, and inspectors were employed to ensure you had one

Whereas today first home buyer expects all the bells and whistle to be in included in the initial purchase price (floor coverings, new furniture, all the electrical necessities – TV, DVD player, CD player etc. central heating and air-conditioning, the list goes on and on, and on and on), when pensioners bough their first home, it was usually little more than as shell. Old sheets for curtains, no floor coverings, basic second hand furniture usually donated by family, with the only luxuries being a fridge and washing machine, usually bought on hire purchase, which had to be paid off before you bought other luxuries like a TV, toasters and other kitchen appliances, carpets, a hot water service and the like. I can still recall heating water in an old copper so we could have a bath (no shower) with everyone using the same bath water, because it wasn’t until 10 years after my parents bought their first home that they could afford buy and install a hot water service; and that was in the 1960’s

Then of course there were home deposits and interest rates. It was a time when people were expected to save at least a 25% deposit before you could even apply for a loan, with interest rates regulated, if memory serves, at 12.5%, and before you could get the loan you actually had to have purchased the house using bridging finance at a significantly higher interest rate, because the actual home loan application approval process usually took a year or more.

Then of course there were those with children. No paid parental leave, no baby bonus, no family supplement, no subsidised childcare, no subsidised after school care. Instead women were expected to leave the workforce as soon as they fell pregnant and if they didn’t leave voluntarily they got the sack. So to make ends meet, fathers more often than not were expected to, if available, to work significant overtime, and if not, find a second part time job to compensate for the drop in family earnings. Then once the children were of school age, mum could only work part time because the expectation was mum would be home before the kids got home from school. Then of course there were school holidays.

Then let’s not forget the fact that, for most, the Super Guarantee came far too late, in that it came into existence in the last half to quarter of their working lives, with most of what they were actually able to save being decimated during the GFC - and with little, if any, residual working life left to rebuild what was lost. I lost over half overnight.

Finally and most telling, when these people asked how in his environment (high personal income tax rates, high prices for every day consumer products, little if any assistance for families forcing people work long hours or a second job just to make ends meet let alone save), were they expected to save enough to retire on, the answer from successive LNP and Labor governments was “you work so hard and pay so much, and get so little in return, so we can guarantee, let me say that again “GUARANTEE”, that when you are no longer able to work, we can afford to pay you enough, so you can get by.

Yes there is intergenerational theft going on, but who is the thief. Is it the pensioner who is now only saying, return to me what paid, and you guaranteed to return when I needed it. Or is a government who wants to reduce pensions to below a subsistence level, so that they can continue to afford to provide to others those election winning benefits which pensions did without. Things like baby bonuses, family benefits, subsidised child and after school care, paid maternity leave, historically the lowest rate of personal income tax ever and historically the lowest interest rates ever, and to help pay for it, pensioners should accept an cut to aged pension so it will ultimately it below subsistence level. But then that their fault because if they wanted better, they should have saved more.

Re: Intergenerational Theft

***super_nova*** — Tue, 03 Feb 2015 01:26:07 GMT

How very true. The LNP are trying to make us as USA, no pensions, no support for those who need it, no universal health care system; nasty selfish society. To justify their actions they talk about the "huge debt" we are leaving the kids. But all worthwhile large project we build were paid off by the next generations, that how it works. Sydney Harbour Bridge, Opera House, Snowy Hydro, train lines, interstate highways...............etc. We need to loo to the future, and invest in 21st century infrastructure, or we are going to be paying for it later and it will cost many times more.

Re: Intergenerational Theft

lind9650 — Tue, 03 Feb 2015 01:38:56 GMT

Intergenerational theft.

I would have slapped Tony Abbott in the face if I had been close to him when he spoke those words.

Who are the thieves? Even parliamentarians did not get as much in salaries and perks when we were working and paying taxes than what they get today.

For a person that gets $1,500.00 + per day to spew such tripe is absolutely disgusting.

What have all the following Governements done with the money that was promised to go into a Retirement Fund for us?

I have raised nine children and neither one of them has ever been without a job. All of them are paying taxes and contributing to their Superannuation funds. My children told me that they would not mind paying a few dollars more if they were guaranteed that the extra tax would benefit the Pensioners. (Their combined taxes would pay several pensions each year)

Unfortunately the politicians greed for their own benefits is greater than the care of the people that elected them into office to govern the country fairly and for the good of the nation. Believing their lies and then being kicked in the guts as a gesture of their gratitude.

Erica

Re: Intergenerational Theft

tall_bearded01 — Tue, 03 Feb 2015 01:50:32 GMT

The Sydney Harbour Bridge is a very good example.

Build in the 1930s, paid for by borrowings and paid off by imposing a toll, and when fully paid for some 60 or so years later, as promised, you got to cross for free. The way it should be. One generation starts it, they and future generations pay for it, and now it’s paid for, it belongs to everyone.

But not if Abbot had his way. He wants it sold, resulting in the reintroduction of a toll so you are once again paying to use something that you used to own, with the money obtained from the sale being used to pay for more infrastructure projects for which we pay and when paid for, it’s sold to the public sector company who can collect more toll, with the process repeating itself over and over …

That is the current generation pay to build so that they can be handed over to the private sector so future generations can pay to use soemthing that used to belong to them.

Re: Intergenerational Theft

gleee58 — Tue, 03 Feb 2015 01:56:01 GMT

Hasn't there always been a toll way to cross the bridge?

One way or both?

Re: Intergenerational Theft

tall_bearded01 — Tue, 03 Feb 2015 01:58:36 GMT

If memory serves it used to be both ways, then one way and then in about the 80's or 90's it was removed entirely.

Re: Intergenerational Theft

gleee58 — Tue, 03 Feb 2015 02:05:56 GMT

@tall_bearded01 wrote:
If memory serves it used to be both ways, then one way and then in about the 80's or 90's it was removed entirely.

I don't think it has been removed, although I could well be wrong about that. The only freebie crossing I've seen was the first walk across at what I think was it's 60 year birthday.

Re: Intergenerational Theft

imastawka — Tue, 03 Feb 2015 02:11:11 GMT

I worked for the Federal Government in the 60' s through to the early 80's.

I paid superannuation all this time. But when I resigned, because I was

a woman, that superannuation was paid out to me in full. I did not apply

for it. It was automatically repaid. How did I steal? So much for funding

my retirement!

Re: Intergenerational Theft

tall_bearded01 — Tue, 03 Feb 2015 02:13:52 GMT

You are actually right. It would appear that though the toll was to be eliminated, it was in fact retained and in fact increased to help pay for the harbour tunnel.

Therefore, if the bridge is sold then the tolls currently collected would be paid to the private sector with the public having to foot the bill re the loss in revenue need for the tunnel.

NB: My original statement was based on what was happing when I was posted to the School of Guns in the early 80’s. That is, 20 cents to cross the bridge one way for CBD bound traffic only,which was expected to be eliminated in its entirely in the next couple of years

Re: Intergenerational Theft

creative*crisis — Tue, 03 Feb 2015 02:14:18 GMT

So now 'm a thief, just when I thought I was too old for life to hold more excitement.

Re: Intergenerational Theft

gleee58 — Tue, 03 Feb 2015 02:18:31 GMT

@tall_bearded01 wrote:
You are actually right. It would appear that though the toll was to be eliminated, it was in fact retained and in fact increased to help pay for the harbour tunnel.

Therefore, if the bridge is sold then the tolls currently collected would be paid to the private sector with the public having to foot the bill re the loss in revenue need for the tunnel.

NB: My original statement was based on what was happing when I was posted to the School of Guns in the early 80’s. That is, 20 cents to cross the bridge one way for CBD bound traffic only,which was expected to be eliminated in its entirely in the next couple of years

The bridge should never be sold. There is no logical reason for public infrastructure to be sold when they have been paid for and are generating returns to the govts. Is the NSW gov seriously considering selling the Bridge?

Re: Intergenerational Theft

tall_bearded01 — Tue, 03 Feb 2015 02:27:34 GMT

The Commonwealth and in particular the Armed Forces are a perfect example as to how super be viewed before the mid-eighties.

There used to be what was called the Defence Force Retirement and Death Benefits Scheme (DFRDB). To qualify you had to be a member of the Regular Defence Forces where you compulsorily paid 5% of you gross wage to the scheme, but you were not entitled to any retirement benefits unless you served 20 years or more, and if you got out earlier you got your contributions back plus bank interest.

That is super was for career employs only. The rest would have to rely on the aged pension.

Re: Intergenerational Theft

vicr3000 — Tue, 03 Feb 2015 02:27:46 GMT

Yes.

And tolls will be applied by car type and postcode. The richer pay more per crossing.

Re: Intergenerational Theft

tall_bearded01 — Tue, 03 Feb 2015 02:35:08 GMT

I’m not sure if the NSW government is considering selling, and IMO they would be a fool to do so.

I do however recall that bridge's were used by Abbott as an example of the kinds of assets that the states could be sell so that state governments could use the money to invest in further infrastructure projects.

Re: Intergenerational Theft

lind9650 — Tue, 03 Feb 2015 06:41:59 GMT

http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2015/2/3/australian-news/tackling-intergenerational-theft-abbott-doesnt-have-clue

Re: Intergenerational Theft

polksaladallie — Tue, 03 Feb 2015 07:12:55 GMT

But then that their fault because if they wanted better, they should have saved more.

There are a couple of posters (or is it the same one?) who have said just this on this forum.

Re: Intergenerational Theft

lind9650 — Tue, 03 Feb 2015 10:10:54 GMT

Yes, Polks, and I am always astounded about the ignorance of those posters. At first I was incensed and felt insulted, but then I realised that those people have no idea about our history or the develpement of this country or anything else before they turned 21.

The same atitude our Governement seems to have. My eldest daughter is older than any of the PMs consortium. No wonder we get such statements from those imbeciles whos main aim is to grab as much money as they can at any cost to the people who build this country.

Erica

Re: Intergenerational Theft

the_great_she_elephant — Tue, 03 Feb 2015 10:36:04 GMT

When I first came to Australia in the early 60s I was surprised that there was no compulsory "National Insurance" scheme like the one we had in England. I was told that it was included in the income tax we paid. When Mr elephant and I married he was an electrician working for a contractor - no super scheme. Soon afterwards he took a job with the Government - WA Railways, and came under the Government Employees Superannuation scheme, which he was able to roll over when he started as a lecturer at TAFE. As a result he was able to retire ona pension equal to a percentage of his retiring wage and indexed to CPI.

When you are young and your life is taken up with bringing up five kids you don't have the time or energy to worry too much about the future and you certainly don't have the resources to save adequately for it, but we appreciate now how extremely lucky we were. If Mr Elephant had not taken that Government job we would be existing today on the Age Pension - thereby, presumably, stealing from the kids we struggled all those years to feed and educate.

Re: Intergenerational Theft

gleee58 — Tue, 03 Feb 2015 12:49:31 GMT

The destruction of the NBN is intergenerational theft, big time.