another "captain's call" exposed

Tony Abbott dumped a plan to tighten the assets test of pensioners outside of the family home which would have seen wealthy pensioners loss their pension to one where all pensioners are penalized. He doesn't seem to like anyone
Message 1 of 22
Latest reply
21 REPLIES 21

another "captain's call" exposed

where are all the ministers who normally defend abbott? I've only seen Hockey and Cormann so far, and treasury has nothing to do with the defence story that was leaked yesterday.

 

 

Message 11 of 22
Latest reply

another "captain's call" exposed

Myoc. - tomorrow in The Australian supposed to be another article spilling some more on Abbott.

Turnbull won't come with co-PM Credlin attached.
Message 12 of 22
Latest reply

another "captain's call" exposed

I can only say for the 5 that I made applications for, 2 in NSW, 3 in Qld.

If a resident has no assetts they are not denied care, they are charged a basic fee, 85% of their pension. If they have assetts they are charged another fee as well, called an accommodation charge.

There are other ways of lowering this fee, some charge an entry fee which can be from about $250,000 up.

The government pays an extra fee for those who have no assetts.

It may also mean there is not a lot of choice in places.

Message 13 of 22
Latest reply

another "captain's call" exposed

"Tony Abbott dumped a plan to tighten the assets test of pensioners outside of the family home which would have seen wealthy pensioners loss their pension to one where all pensioners are penalized. He doesn't seem to like anyone"

 

Rudd and Gillard dumped 136 of the 138 recommendations  from their own Henry Tax Review, this would have gone some way to address the problem of the incessant gimme gimme gimme of 80% of the electorate,

Myopic Tongues2 Small.jpg

Sans,. of course,  any  contribute contribute contribute!

 

 

Anyway as C&P of articles without comment are in vogue:

 

Flow Chart: The existing means test for the Age Pension

 

How would anyone here suggest any of the above change, and possibly modify the taper test?

 

John 270.jpg

Message 14 of 22
Latest reply

another "captain's call" exposed


@myoclon1cjerk wrote:
Murdoch's really gunning for Abbott isn't he? Maybe he sees Turnbull as more 'user friendly'.

I think it's just that Murdoch now see's Abbott as a loud mouth boof. I think Abbott should change his name to Hipshot.

Message 15 of 22
Latest reply

another "captain's call" exposed

 " Business has lost confidence in the PM"  Really A3?.     I  think business is far more concerned with the economic climate, as opposed to whoever is PM now or in the past (sorry),   and their "contentment" would be well represented by the AllOrds:

 

Here is the "odoriferous"  XAO  covering the stinking "Govt's" current tenure:

 

 

Or and of course our largest bank: the CBA

 

CBA has just announced a FF interim dividend $1.98.  This is an increase of 8 per cent on the 2014 interim dividend paid 3 April 2014.

Confidence is in the eye of the economic observer, not a politically biased devotee e.g. :Myopic Tongues2 Small.jpg

Message 16 of 22
Latest reply

another "captain's call" exposed

Seems to me there was less gimme,gimme back in the old days when the divide between rich and poor was much narrower.More jobs too.That problem is not just local.Other countries like the U.S and the U.K have the same problem even with a manufacturing base.
This problem really took off under the lazy and inflationary economic policies if Hiward/Costello and their vote buying middle class handouts.
Young people cannot buy a house now because of those policies.Good for the banks share price though.Every time someone signs up for a home loan that's another $ million plus in the kittty by the time it's paid off.
Message 17 of 22
Latest reply

another "captain's call" exposed


@azureline** wrote:

Something he should consider is the way some families of the elderly in nursing homes are allowed to keep the family home and live there rent free, thereby allowing the elderly resident to be only paying the basic fee, 85% of the pension.

The home is not considered in the assetts test. So, the taxpayer is paying for half of their care fees. It's greedy because the family then inherits it.

Edit :(not talking about spouses)


I dont know how many would get away with that, the rules here in Vic are that anyone living in the house has to be a dependant and has to have lived there for a while, maybe 2 years I think? Maybe other states have different rules?

 photo screen-1-1-1-1.jpg
Message 18 of 22
Latest reply

another "captain's call" exposed


@azureline** wrote:

Something he should consider is the way some families of the elderly in nursing homes are allowed to keep the family home and live there rent free, thereby allowing the elderly resident to be only paying the basic fee, 85% of the pension.

The home is not considered in the assetts test. So, the taxpayer is paying for half of their care fees. It's greedy because the family then inherits it.

Edit :(not talking about spouses)


I didn't know about that.  I always wondered why whenever the prospect of selling the family house comes up, everyone jumps up and down, saying "why should Mum have to sell the home she has had for 60 years?"

 

My view is that they are never going to move back there, so it should be sold to pay for her care.

 

Now I understand, they have someone in mind who is going to live in it.

 

My view is that every benefit should be strictly means tested.  There are too many people of all ages who do not need benefits, but are getting them.

Message 19 of 22
Latest reply

another "captain's call" exposed


@punch*drunk wrote:

@azureline** wrote:

Something he should consider is the way some families of the elderly in nursing homes are allowed to keep the family home and live there rent free, thereby allowing the elderly resident to be only paying the basic fee, 85% of the pension.

The home is not considered in the assetts test. So, the taxpayer is paying for half of their care fees. It's greedy because the family then inherits it.

Edit :(not talking about spouses)


I dont know how many would get away with that, the rules here in Vic are that anyone living in the house has to be a dependant and has to have lived there for a while, maybe 2 years I think? Maybe other states have different rules?


I am sure the rules are the same in every state but some people are good at fraud, apparently.

I spoke to a lady yesterday who has moved into her mother's home, with her spouse... and is 60yo, so it's not likely she is her mum's dependant, so they don't have to sell the home. Her reasoning was that she can take mum home occasionally and see all her stuff..... I don't think mum goes out much though.

I was gobsmacked she told me...............

Message 20 of 22
Latest reply