News

NewsTime to give the over 50's a voice in budget debates on tax, retirement and work
Time to give the over 50's a voice in budget debates on tax, retirement and work

Time to give the over 50's a voice in budget debates on tax, retirement and work

As debate hots up before the Federal Budget, it’s time to gauge the views of those most affected by the hip-pocket issues being discussed – the over-50s.

The 120,000-member FiftyUp Club has today launched its second annual pre-Budget survey, asking the over-50s what they think about:

  • Pensions and superannuation
  • Negative gearing,
  • The GST and
  • Working to age 70

Consumers over 50 can now give their views HERE on big questions such as whether access to the pension should be more strict, the GST should be extended, or negative gearing should be ended.

They’ll also be asked about work experiences ahead of the inquiry into discrimination against older workers, announced this week (see Appendix).

Last year’s FiftyUp Club Budget Survey attracted more than 6,500 responses on pensions, Medicare and other issues and was presented to the federal government. The same will be done this year.

“Big decisions in these areas affect us not just now but well into the future and will impact on how we plan, save and prepare — so it’s vital we have a voice in these debates,” says FiftyUp Club guest commentator Christopher Zinn.

“As a group with age and experience, but not always money and influence, we need to let decision-makers know what we think before it’s too late.”

The FiftyUp Club has over 120,000 members and uses their buying power to negotiate special offers and lobby on their behalf. It’s free to join at FiftyUpClub.com

Click Here to take our 5-Minute Survey

 

 

APPENDIX

Recent Budget Related News

  1. ‘Stop rich from using negative gearing to offset wages, save $1b : ACOSS’, Sydney Morning Herald, 16 April 2015 by Nassim Khadem Read Here
  2. ‘How a 12 per cent GST could deliver a $100,000 earner an income-tax cut of $34 a week’, News.com.au, 1 April 2015 by John Rolfe Read Here
  3. 'Tony Abbott pledges to protect our superannuation: No changes during his term of government and beyond’, The Daily Telegraph, 16 April 2015 by Simon Benson Read Here
  4. ‘Age Discrimination: Federal Government inquiry to examine barriers older workers face in finding jobs’, ABC Online, 15 April 2015 by Nick Dole Read Here
  5. ‘Opinion: Politicians can’t be trusted to make decisions about superannuation’, Courier Mail, 15 April 2015 by Jeff Kennett Read Here
Originally posted on .

Join the conversation

FiftyUp Club
Time to give the over 50's a voice in budget debates on tax, retirement and work

Share your views with other members. 

Want to leave a comment? or .
Read our moderation policy here.
Garry
Garry from QLD commented:

I have been working from the age of 12. Doing a 30 Km paper run on a pushbike every day and a milk run in the morning from 4.00am to 8.00am before I went to school. Saving for my first car. I worked till I was 65years old, and now I can't do anything because of my back. How will other people get on if they have to work to 70years old? Time they can stop work they will not be able to enjoy a couple of years that they have left. How many people will be able to in joy the remaining years. Whey can cut their pensions in half and that will save the country. They are not game to say that they don't control their pension. That way they can duck for cover. 

Deborah
Deborah from QLD commented:

I work for Qld Health . I think the dole should be given in the form of vouchers as l see first hand where their money goes !!!!! On hair extensions , alcohol ,Tatoos and piercing whilst their children are neglected from nutrition ,claiming their can't afford things !, yeah...right.But they Bragg about how much they paid for the Tatoos !,,,,!!!!!!! 

Jennifer
Jennifer from WA commented:

I am retired due to ill health, however the cost of living makes every fortnight a struggle. It would be nice if this country could sort out the Government's lurks and perks and for them to stop blaming pensioners for their mismanagement. 

Jennifer
Jennifer from NSW commented:

I truly believe that if you are on a pension, then the cost of your pension should be paid back from your whole estate. After all, when you are dead, you no longer need your multi million dollar place of residence, and this way, there would be no pressure to sell your residence while you need it to live in. The welfare for middle and upper middle class welfare receipients has got totally out of hand and welfare will only stretch just so far. It should be for those who need it. And if your total assets including your place of residence is currently over one million dollars, then you SHOULD NOT BE ON THE PENSION. You have assets. And yes, I know we all worked hard, but not everyone is fortunate, and yes, I also know many people bought their homes when it was cheaper. (a lot ). But I am talking about right now, not 40 years or so years ago. 

neil
neil from NSW replied to Jennifer:

you are a joke. i have never been unemployed or received social security payments in my life. Do you know how much tax i have paid in 50 years of work. It is my turn now to get something back to benefit my children and grandchildren. not all of us live in the heart of big cities where dummies like you pay overs for housing. 

Karen
Karen from NSW replied to Jennifer:

I agree in principal Jennifer but not the $1000000 threshold you suggest. There is general consensus that a single person needs an income of $40000 a year for a modest standard of living in retirement. To generate this amount you need to have a conservative $800000 in super. Add to that the cost of even modest housing in NSW and you are well over the million dollar you suggest. I do agree that keeping the 'family home' for the kids after your death makes absolutely no sense. It should be sold to fund retirement and of course to purchase a smaller abode. 

Christine
Christine from QLD commented:

I like my work, which is fortunate, as I will have no choice but to continue, probably until I drop dead! I do object to being discriminated against, as my experience is valuable - the problem is - it means I am too expensive for many employers in my field. If any government wants us to work until we are 70, then the following issues need to be addressed at the same time, because, if we are fit enough to work, then we should expect: 1. raised age limits for drivers' licences 2. raised age limits for insurances, including travel insurance As for means testing, I am against it. I do not believe that one's assets should be taken into account, as these are often not in cash, but in property such as the family home. I also resent the fact that I have been trying to save in order NOT to be dependent on government handouts - and joy of joys! I end up being taxed on my savings! That's the reward we get for trying to do the right thing. I may as well keep my money in a tin at home. 

Vickie
Vickie from NSW commented:

I would like to know WHY politicians who no longer hold a seat still get benefits from taxpayers. Eg a fully funded office, free flights, overseas travel, chauffeured cars plus very generous superannuation scheme and numerous other benefits. Collectively these handouts would place a huge burden on State & Federal economy's. Next time our beloved leaders are blaming pensioners for the drain on the economy I would like to see retired politicians figures disclosed at the same time. 

Lawrence
Lawrence from QLD commented:

Lets get serious. Either the aged pension is for those who put in (paid taxes) all their working life, so they can retire with lower financial stress. Or, it's all about welfare in which case pay only the needy, the ones who fell through the cracks through no fault of their own, such as an elderly woman who losses her husband then to find the house is mortgaged up to the hilt for gaming debts or someone with some other unforseen problem. Sure, help them, give them vouchers (or some form of electronic system) that can only used on food, shelter and clothing. I'm fed up with paying other peoples pensions only to find they live better than I do (yup - don't qualify for a pension). In my opinion the aged pension for a couple is a ridiculously high amount of cash. They've had their whole lives to sort it out but instead lived the 'Life of Riley' and now rely on being paid from money forcibly donated by other tax payers. That said, I feel the family home should remain out of the argument. In a lot of cases it's not some elderly persons fault their house value increased. Don't make someone have to consider selling their home just because they bought it at a time and in an area where values outside of their control have risen. 

Jacqueline
Jacqueline from QLD commented:

It annoys me that the over 50s are being targeted as responsible for a future blowout in revenue due to needing the old age pension. The stark reality is the superannuation was NOT compulsory until about 1996 and very few companies, even public ones, encouraged staff to join a super scheme. I was with the NSW Dept of Education for ten years and was never even advised/ encouraged/ told to join a superannuation scheme. There is no way the these people have enough in superannuation due to this. Pick on those who have been in a scheme all of their working life; not those who are not responsible for this shortfall in the budget. 

Robert
Robert from NSW commented:

I get very frustrated with the young and middle aged unemployed who refuse to look for work conscientiously the dole is for genuine people who through no fault of there own find it difficult to find work how often do you see companies take a hand out from the government to employ such people and after the 3 month the subsidy finishes the poor person is put off with the excuse that there is not enough work to keep them employed, Tighten up the rules to stop greedy employers and bludgers who think that the Dole is there gifted right 

Vickie
Vickie from NSW commented:

Sick of being blamed for all the problems of today. Show some respect to the hard workers who built this country. We raised families, paid taxes, built homes all with little government handouts. A little "Child Endowment" We worked for our pensions/part pensions, now they want to move the goalposts. Had government not allowed our industries and assets be sold off overseas we would have employment for OUR people, then profits and taxes would have stayed within our country. Not be in the mess that has been created. Soon there will be nothing left to sell. If over 65's are so much a drain on Australia why not just give us a lethal injection and get rid of us. 

Gertraud
Gertraud from ACT replied to Vickie:

You are forgetting the spouse and children tax rebates! 

Vickie
Vickie from NSW replied to Gertraud:

Nothing like the benefits today for child minding or baby bonus. Difference in Single man & married man tax really put lobster on the table. Mostly helped pay bills. As long as the wife could afford to stay home. 

Comment Guidelines