As Australia prepares for the upcoming federal budget, experts are warning against splitting welfare payments based on age.

In recent days, media reports have suggested the federal budget may include a slight increase to JobSeeker, with the extra money going exclusively to those aged over 55. You can read our report on this news here. But one leading economist recently warned that such an action would be disastrous, setting a ‘dangerous precedent’ in which some welfare recipients aren't treated as equals.

Advocates are worried that age-specific welfare increases could cause a rift between generations. Credit: Shutterstock

Danielle Wood, CEO of the Grattan Institute, spoke about the issue at the National Press Club in Canberra on Wednesday.

'I do think it is a bit of a slippery slope, this division of people on those payments,' she said.

'Equally, people under 55 are really struggling to get by.'

These comments came alongside the Australian Council of Social Service (ACOSS)'s calls to increase JobSeeker to at least $75 per day in order to help people meet their basic needs. The council has calculated that this increase would come at a cost of around $9 billion a year and that it's well within the government's realm of possibility.

However, ACOSS's call hasn't been heeded and the government has rejected calls from two expert panels for an increase to JobSeeker for everyone on the payment. So, at this stage, it seems the only sort of increase we can expect (if any) is one tailored exclusively for those over 55.

Leaked reports suggest that the government’s proposed $3.70 a day increase to about 227,000 JobSeeker recipients aged over 55. While Treasurer Jim Chalmers refused to confirm or deny these reports, he did declare unemployed women over 55 to be the ‘most vulnerable’ cohort of unemployed Australians.

This controversial proposal, rumoured to be included in the upcoming budget announcement, has garnered its fair share of backlash from welfare advocates and various Labor MPs. Despite Wood being no fan of the proposal herself, she expressed that she wouldn’t begrudge anyone over 55 an increase if that was the final decision from the government.

Antipoverty Centre spokesperson Kristin O'Connell stated, 'Restricting an increase in JobSeeker to people of a certain age is really an attempt to divide us and to encourage people to think that there are “deserving” and “undeserving” welfare recipients.'

Abby Manning, 20, knows all too well what it’s like to live off Centrelink while trying to find work. Last year, she relied on the payment of approximately $33 per day while studying at TAFE for a career in disability support.

‘It definitely was not enough to live on,’ she said. ‘I couldn't afford the basics [and] I definitely couldn't afford my rent’. In the end, Ms Manning was forced to drop out of TAFE and get a job working as an organiser for the Greens in the lead-up to the last federal election.

She is reportedly horrified that her generation of unemployed Australians is being overlooked.

‘I definitely feel like my generation isn't being cared for,’ she said. ‘The government simply doesn't want to prioritise its spending on young people.’

Meanwhile, Carolie O’Connor, 63, has been borrowing money from family members to help pay her bills. Despite the proposed modest increase, every extra bit of JobSeeker payment she receives would still go towards energy and water bills, leaving her far from financially comfortable.

Historically, unemployment payments leaned towards helping younger recipients. However, the number of older Australians on JobSeeker has increased significantly over the past few decades. Member comments on our previous story suggest this could be due to the difficulty of strict eligibility criteria for disability payments.

Women over 55, who once comprised only 2 per cent of recipients in 2001, now make up the largest proportion of JobSeeker recipients at 16 per cent.

The Grattan Institute has put forward their own suggestion which could help offset the cost of such an increase. They suggest the government cancels part of its Stage 3 tax cuts, which are set to come into effect in 2024.

By keeping the 37 per cent tax bracket, rather than scrapping it altogether as previously planned, the government could save around $8 billion a year, consequently offsetting the cost of increasing JobSeeker. As Ms Wood highlighted, 'That alone would offset the fiscal and inflationary impact of a JobSeeker rise.'

Key Takeaways

• A leading economist has warned against creating two classes of welfare recipients by increasing JobSeeker only for Australians aged over 55.
• Grattan Institute CEO Danielle Wood spoke at the National Press Club in Canberra, cautioning against splitting welfare payments based on age.
• The government is yet to confirm reports of a JobSeeker increase for people over 55 in the upcoming federal budget.
• Women aged 55-64 now make up the largest cohort on the JobSeeker payment.
• Advocates argue that everyone on unemployment payments needs a significant increase to lift them out of poverty.
• The decision to increase JobSeeker payments for those over 55 while ‘neglecting younger recipients’ has been met with criticism and feelings of being ignored by the younger generation.
• The Grattan Institute has proposed redesigning the contentious stage three tax cuts, saving around $8bn a year.

So far the government has not commented on this suggestion, but the Labor Party have promised to keep the Stage 3 tax cuts in place.

Age-specific welfare increases could become a complicated, risky factor in Australia's economy and social policy, creating resentment and tension between different generations.

Members, this is a complex and very important issue. But what do you think? Should JobSeeker be increased for all Australians on the payment or just those aged over 55? Is it unfair for younger generations to dismiss the increase for over 55s? Let us know in the comments below.

 

[JG48]

As Australia prepares for the upcoming federal budget, experts are warning against splitting welfare payments based on age.

In recent days, media reports have suggested the federal budget may include a slight increase to JobSeeker, with the extra money going exclusively to those aged over 55. You can read our report on this news here. But one leading economist recently warned that such an action would be disastrous, setting a ‘dangerous precedent’ in which some welfare recipients aren't treated as equals.

View attachment 19059

Advocates are worried that age-specific welfare increases could cause a rift between generations. Credit: Shutterstock

Danielle Wood, CEO of the Grattan Institute, spoke about the issue at the National Press Club in Canberra on Wednesday.

'I do think it is a bit of a slippery slope, this division of people on those payments,' she said.

'Equally, people under 55 are really struggling to get by.'

These comments came alongside the Australian Council of Social Service (ACOSS)'s calls to increase JobSeeker to at least $75 per day in order to help people meet their basic needs. The council has calculated that this increase would come at a cost of around $9 billion a year and that it's well within the government's realm of possibility.

However, ACOSS's call hasn't been heeded and the government has rejected calls from two expert panels for an increase to JobSeeker for everyone on the payment. So, at this stage, it seems the only sort of increase we can expect (if any) is one tailored exclusively for those over 55.

Leaked reports suggest that the government’s proposed $3.70 a day increase to about 227,000 JobSeeker recipients aged over 55. While Treasurer Jim Chalmers refused to confirm or deny these reports, he did declare unemployed women over 55 to be the ‘most vulnerable’ cohort of unemployed Australians.

This controversial proposal, rumoured to be included in the upcoming budget announcement, has garnered its fair share of backlash from welfare advocates and various Labor MPs. Despite Wood being no fan of the proposal herself, she expressed that she wouldn’t begrudge anyone over 55 an increase if that was the final decision from the government.

Antipoverty Centre spokesperson Kristin O'Connell stated, 'Restricting an increase in JobSeeker to people of a certain age is really an attempt to divide us and to encourage people to think that there are “deserving” and “undeserving” welfare recipients.'

Abby Manning, 20, knows all too well what it’s like to live off Centrelink while trying to find work. Last year, she relied on the payment of approximately $33 per day while studying at TAFE for a career in disability support.

‘It definitely was not enough to live on,’ she said. ‘I couldn't afford the basics [and] I definitely couldn't afford my rent’. In the end, Ms Manning was forced to drop out of TAFE and get a job working as an organiser for the Greens in the lead-up to the last federal election.

She is reportedly horrified that her generation of unemployed Australians is being overlooked.

‘I definitely feel like my generation isn't being cared for,’ she said. ‘The government simply doesn't want to prioritise its spending on young people.’

Meanwhile, Carolie O’Connor, 63, has been borrowing money from family members to help pay her bills. Despite the proposed modest increase, every extra bit of JobSeeker payment she receives would still go towards energy and water bills, leaving her far from financially comfortable.

Historically, unemployment payments leaned towards helping younger recipients. However, the number of older Australians on JobSeeker has increased significantly over the past few decades. Member comments on our previous story suggest this could be due to the difficulty of strict eligibility criteria for disability payments.

Women over 55, who once comprised only 2 per cent of recipients in 2001, now make up the largest proportion of JobSeeker recipients at 16 per cent.

The Grattan Institute has put forward their own suggestion which could help offset the cost of such an increase. They suggest the government cancels part of its Stage 3 tax cuts, which are set to come into effect in 2024.

By keeping the 37 per cent tax bracket, rather than scrapping it altogether as previously planned, the government could save around $8 billion a year, consequently offsetting the cost of increasing JobSeeker. As Ms Wood highlighted, 'That alone would offset the fiscal and inflationary impact of a JobSeeker rise.'

Key Takeaways

• A leading economist has warned against creating two classes of welfare recipients by increasing JobSeeker only for Australians aged over 55.
• Grattan Institute CEO Danielle Wood spoke at the National Press Club in Canberra, cautioning against splitting welfare payments based on age.
• The government is yet to confirm reports of a JobSeeker increase for people over 55 in the upcoming federal budget.
• Women aged 55-64 now make up the largest cohort on the JobSeeker payment.
• Advocates argue that everyone on unemployment payments needs a significant increase to lift them out of poverty.
• The decision to increase JobSeeker payments for those over 55 while ‘neglecting younger recipients’ has been met with criticism and feelings of being ignored by the younger generation.
• The Grattan Institute has proposed redesigning the contentious stage three tax cuts, saving around $8bn a year.

So far the government has not commented on this suggestion, but the Labor Party have promised to keep the Stage 3 tax cuts in place.

Age-specific welfare increases could become a complicated, risky factor in Australia's economy and social policy, creating resentment and tension between different generations.

Members, this is a complex and very important issue. But what do you think? Should JobSeeker be increased for all Australians on the payment or just those aged over 55? Is it unfair for younger generations to dismiss the increase for over 55s? Let us know in the comments below

We have a Government attempting to divide the Country by race, so division by age is just another example of this Governments logic. This division by age concept is simply " WRONG ".

.

P

 

[Dizzy]

As Australia prepares for the upcoming federal budget, experts are warning against splitting welfare payments based on age.

In recent days, media reports have suggested the federal budget may include a slight increase to JobSeeker, with the extra money going exclusively to those aged over 55. You can read our report on this news here. But one leading economist recently warned that such an action would be disastrous, setting a ‘dangerous precedent’ in which some welfare recipients aren't treated as equals.

View attachment 19059

Advocates are worried that age-specific welfare increases could cause a rift between generations. Credit: Shutterstock

Danielle Wood, CEO of the Grattan Institute, spoke about the issue at the National Press Club in Canberra on Wednesday.

'I do think it is a bit of a slippery slope, this division of people on those payments,' she said.

'Equally, people under 55 are really struggling to get by.'

These comments came alongside the Australian Council of Social Service (ACOSS)'s calls to increase JobSeeker to at least $75 per day in order to help people meet their basic needs. The council has calculated that this increase would come at a cost of around $9 billion a year and that it's well within the government's realm of possibility.

However, ACOSS's call hasn't been heeded and the government has rejected calls from two expert panels for an increase to JobSeeker for everyone on the payment. So, at this stage, it seems the only sort of increase we can expect (if any) is one tailored exclusively for those over 55.

Leaked reports suggest that the government’s proposed $3.70 a day increase to about 227,000 JobSeeker recipients aged over 55. While Treasurer Jim Chalmers refused to confirm or deny these reports, he did declare unemployed women over 55 to be the ‘most vulnerable’ cohort of unemployed Australians.

This controversial proposal, rumoured to be included in the upcoming budget announcement, has garnered its fair share of backlash from welfare advocates and various Labor MPs. Despite Wood being no fan of the proposal herself, she expressed that she wouldn’t begrudge anyone over 55 an increase if that was the final decision from the government.

Antipoverty Centre spokesperson Kristin O'Connell stated, 'Restricting an increase in JobSeeker to people of a certain age is really an attempt to divide us and to encourage people to think that there are “deserving” and “undeserving” welfare recipients.'

Abby Manning, 20, knows all too well what it’s like to live off Centrelink while trying to find work. Last year, she relied on the payment of approximately $33 per day while studying at TAFE for a career in disability support.

‘It definitely was not enough to live on,’ she said. ‘I couldn't afford the basics [and] I definitely couldn't afford my rent’. In the end, Ms Manning was forced to drop out of TAFE and get a job working as an organiser for the Greens in the lead-up to the last federal election.

She is reportedly horrified that her generation of unemployed Australians is being overlooked.

‘I definitely feel like my generation isn't being cared for,’ she said. ‘The government simply doesn't want to prioritise its spending on young people.’

Meanwhile, Carolie O’Connor, 63, has been borrowing money from family members to help pay her bills. Despite the proposed modest increase, every extra bit of JobSeeker payment she receives would still go towards energy and water bills, leaving her far from financially comfortable.

Historically, unemployment payments leaned towards helping younger recipients. However, the number of older Australians on JobSeeker has increased significantly over the past few decades. Member comments on our previous story suggest this could be due to the difficulty of strict eligibility criteria for disability payments.

Women over 55, who once comprised only 2 per cent of recipients in 2001, now make up the largest proportion of JobSeeker recipients at 16 per cent.

The Grattan Institute has put forward their own suggestion which could help offset the cost of such an increase. They suggest the government cancels part of its Stage 3 tax cuts, which are set to come into effect in 2024.

By keeping the 37 per cent tax bracket, rather than scrapping it altogether as previously planned, the government could save around $8 billion a year, consequently offsetting the cost of increasing JobSeeker. As Ms Wood highlighted, 'That alone would offset the fiscal and inflationary impact of a JobSeeker rise.'

Key Takeaways

• A leading economist has warned against creating two classes of welfare recipients by increasing JobSeeker only for Australians aged over 55.
• Grattan Institute CEO Danielle Wood spoke at the National Press Club in Canberra, cautioning against splitting welfare payments based on age.
• The government is yet to confirm reports of a JobSeeker increase for people over 55 in the upcoming federal budget.
• Women aged 55-64 now make up the largest cohort on the JobSeeker payment.
• Advocates argue that everyone on unemployment payments needs a significant increase to lift them out of poverty.
• The decision to increase JobSeeker payments for those over 55 while ‘neglecting younger recipients’ has been met with criticism and feelings of being ignored by the younger generation.
• The Grattan Institute has proposed redesigning the contentious stage three tax cuts, saving around $8bn a year.

So far the government has not commented on this suggestion, but the Labor Party have promised to keep the Stage 3 tax cuts in place.

Age-specific welfare increases could become a complicated, risky factor in Australia's economy and social policy, creating resentment and tension between different generations.

Members, this is a complex and very important issue. But what do you think? Should JobSeeker be increased for all Australians on the payment or just those aged over 55? Is it unfair for younger generations to dismiss the increase for over 55s? Let us know in the comments below.

I agree that Youth and Jobseeker are seriously low but there is one cohort which have been left out everywhere. Pensioners who have no super or investments or savings and no home or are renting. We don’t get tax breaks or rate related profits and many of us are ill and need heaps of meds. When will we get a break?

 

[Sloopy]

I agree that Youth and Jobseeker are seriously low but there is one cohort which have been left out everywhere. Pensioners who have no super or investments or savings and no home or are renting. We don’t get tax breaks or rate related profits and many of us are ill and need heaps of meds. When will we get a break?

Pensioners, of whom I am one, already get a significantly higher rate.

Many (possibly up to 20% according to recent reports) people on Jobseeker are disabled or suffer chronic illnesses and should be on DSP, but it has become so difficult to get that they are on Jobseeker instead. When physically unable to work due to illness, I found myself on Jobseeker in my sixties my pharmaceutical bills were over $50 per fortnight out of a $600 payment, which was already higher than the majority of recipients due to my age.

 

[Glo72]

Everyone should be treated equally. Jobseeker payment should be the same for everyone who is on it. Poverty doesn’t just affect the older generation.

 

[ToniaKisliakov]

As Australia prepares for the upcoming federal budget, experts are warning against splitting welfare payments based on age.

In recent days, media reports have suggested the federal budget may include a slight increase to JobSeeker, with the extra money going exclusively to those aged over 55. You can read our report on this news here. But one leading economist recently warned that such an action would be disastrous, setting a ‘dangerous precedent’ in which some welfare recipients aren't treated as equals.

View attachment 19059

Advocates are worried that age-specific welfare increases could cause a rift between generations. Credit: Shutterstock

Danielle Wood, CEO of the Grattan Institute, spoke about the issue at the National Press Club in Canberra on Wednesday.

'I do think it is a bit of a slippery slope, this division of people on those payments,' she said.

'Equally, people under 55 are really struggling to get by.'

These comments came alongside the Australian Council of Social Service (ACOSS)'s calls to increase JobSeeker to at least $75 per day in order to help people meet their basic needs. The council has calculated that this increase would come at a cost of around $9 billion a year and that it's well within the government's realm of possibility.

However, ACOSS's call hasn't been heeded and the government has rejected calls from two expert panels for an increase to JobSeeker for everyone on the payment. So, at this stage, it seems the only sort of increase we can expect (if any) is one tailored exclusively for those over 55.

Leaked reports suggest that the government’s proposed $3.70 a day increase to about 227,000 JobSeeker recipients aged over 55. While Treasurer Jim Chalmers refused to confirm or deny these reports, he did declare unemployed women over 55 to be the ‘most vulnerable’ cohort of unemployed Australians.

This controversial proposal, rumoured to be included in the upcoming budget announcement, has garnered its fair share of backlash from welfare advocates and various Labor MPs. Despite Wood being no fan of the proposal herself, she expressed that she wouldn’t begrudge anyone over 55 an increase if that was the final decision from the government.

Antipoverty Centre spokesperson Kristin O'Connell stated, 'Restricting an increase in JobSeeker to people of a certain age is really an attempt to divide us and to encourage people to think that there are “deserving” and “undeserving” welfare recipients.'

Abby Manning, 20, knows all too well what it’s like to live off Centrelink while trying to find work. Last year, she relied on the payment of approximately $33 per day while studying at TAFE for a career in disability support.

‘It definitely was not enough to live on,’ she said. ‘I couldn't afford the basics [and] I definitely couldn't afford my rent’. In the end, Ms Manning was forced to drop out of TAFE and get a job working as an organiser for the Greens in the lead-up to the last federal election.

She is reportedly horrified that her generation of unemployed Australians is being overlooked.

‘I definitely feel like my generation isn't being cared for,’ she said. ‘The government simply doesn't want to prioritise its spending on young people.’

Meanwhile, Carolie O’Connor, 63, has been borrowing money from family members to help pay her bills. Despite the proposed modest increase, every extra bit of JobSeeker payment she receives would still go towards energy and water bills, leaving her far from financially comfortable.

Historically, unemployment payments leaned towards helping younger recipients. However, the number of older Australians on JobSeeker has increased significantly over the past few decades. Member comments on our previous story suggest this could be due to the difficulty of strict eligibility criteria for disability payments.

Women over 55, who once comprised only 2 per cent of recipients in 2001, now make up the largest proportion of JobSeeker recipients at 16 per cent.

The Grattan Institute has put forward their own suggestion which could help offset the cost of such an increase. They suggest the government cancels part of its Stage 3 tax cuts, which are set to come into effect in 2024.

By keeping the 37 per cent tax bracket, rather than scrapping it altogether as previously planned, the government could save around $8 billion a year, consequently offsetting the cost of increasing JobSeeker. As Ms Wood highlighted, 'That alone would offset the fiscal and inflationary impact of a JobSeeker rise.'

Key Takeaways

• A leading economist has warned against creating two classes of welfare recipients by increasing JobSeeker only for Australians aged over 55.
• Grattan Institute CEO Danielle Wood spoke at the National Press Club in Canberra, cautioning against splitting welfare payments based on age.
• The government is yet to confirm reports of a JobSeeker increase for people over 55 in the upcoming federal budget.
• Women aged 55-64 now make up the largest cohort on the JobSeeker payment.
• Advocates argue that everyone on unemployment payments needs a significant increase to lift them out of poverty.
• The decision to increase JobSeeker payments for those over 55 while ‘neglecting younger recipients’ has been met with criticism and feelings of being ignored by the younger generation.
• The Grattan Institute has proposed redesigning the contentious stage three tax cuts, saving around $8bn a year.

So far the government has not commented on this suggestion, but the Labor Party have promised to keep the Stage 3 tax cuts in place.

Age-specific welfare increases could become a complicated, risky factor in Australia's economy and social policy, creating resentment and tension between different generations.

Members, this is a complex and very important issue. But what do you think? Should JobSeeker be increased for all Australians on the payment or just those aged over 55? Is it unfair for younger generations to dismiss the increase for over 55s? Let us know in the comments below.

 

[ToniaKisliakov]

Everyone should be treated equally. Jobseeker payment should be the same for everyone who is on it. Poverty doesn’t just affect the older generation.

Jobseeker discriminates is for a certain age brackets
Others need not apply it seems as either too rich (cash poor) or too young or too old

 

[Klaus A]

Different payments for different ages.
Different payments for different sexes.
Different payments for different races.
Great, We are living in a country of equality.
The pension should be reserved for the ones,who have worked and paid taxes in this country for 20 or 30 years and are over 65. And that regardless of assets. Every other payment should be the same.

 

[Trudi]

I agree that Youth and Jobseeker are seriously low but there is one cohort which have been left out everywhere. Pensioners who have no super or investments or savings and no home or are renting. We don’t get tax breaks or rate related profits and many of us are ill and need heaps of meds. When will we get a break?

I don't agree. From the time I entered the workforce at the age of 17, I was aware that I needed to save towards my retirement if for no better reason than that there were just too many of us boomers.

In the early 1970s my then husband and I took out superannuation policies through an insurance company. When we split a few years later, we divided the increase in value of our house in two (he kept his things and I kept mine), which gave me just enough for a deposit on a modest house for my three kids and myself, there were no child support payments from the ex. A few years later, I sold that house and had a new, larger house built. I then re-married, had another child and my second husband nearly broke me financially within the two years of our marriage, but I was able to keep my house.

Over the next few years, I made several interstate moves and bought three more properties while keeping the ones I already had. I also contributed between 5% and 10% of my gross income into super, all while raising my youngest child as a single mother. I had my current house built when I was 62 years old.

Since retiring, I have sold two of my properties and still own two rental properties and my own home. Obviously, I do not get any pension because of my assets, but that was my goal from the very start, to be financially independent.

 

[Trudi]

Everyone should be treated equally. Jobseeker payment should be the same for everyone who is on it. Poverty doesn’t just affect the older generation.

Jobseeker payments should be the same amount as age pension.

 

[Aussie all the Way]

No one ever says in their remarks about how Centrelink, Jobseeker is not enough to live on, is of cause the way to make your life easier and meet your payments of any kind is to get a job, there is always a Job section in the papers with wanted adds or in shop windows. Pensioners are always the ones Overlooked, they are the ones who have left jobs for the younger gen to take over but they don't seem to want to. Pensioners leave the workforce giving up a normal wage to get the Pension a mere pittance of a real wage. People keep missing the point that these payments where NEVER designed to be able to lived on, but generations of people have found a way because you have people who have been unemployed for 5+ years and longer.

 

[ToniaKisliakov]

Different payments for different ages.
Different payments for different sexes.
Different payments for different races.
Great, We are living in a country of equality.

 

[Pat T]

Jobseeker payments should be the same amount as age pension.

Over 55 are more restricted at finding jobs. There are plenty of seasonal jobs going that could be done while looking for something more likeable. Temporary jobs are better than no job. If two persons came for a job, one doing part time work and one none, I would always give the working one the job as knew he was keen. There are businesses closing because they can’t get staff. Too many of the younger ones want the supervisors jobs( even had one who wanted the bosses job), days off because it’s their birthday and must take their mates. If they get an increase it should be a voucher for food only.

 

[Leoni]

As Australia prepares for the upcoming federal budget, experts are warning against splitting welfare payments based on age.

In recent days, media reports have suggested the federal budget may include a slight increase to JobSeeker, with the extra money going exclusively to those aged over 55. You can read our report on this news here. But one leading economist recently warned that such an action would be disastrous, setting a ‘dangerous precedent’ in which some welfare recipients aren't treated as equals.

View attachment 19059

Advocates are worried that age-specific welfare increases could cause a rift between generations. Credit: Shutterstock

Danielle Wood, CEO of the Grattan Institute, spoke about the issue at the National Press Club in Canberra on Wednesday.

'I do think it is a bit of a slippery slope, this division of people on those payments,' she said.

'Equally, people under 55 are really struggling to get by.'

These comments came alongside the Australian Council of Social Service (ACOSS)'s calls to increase JobSeeker to at least $75 per day in order to help people meet their basic needs. The council has calculated that this increase would come at a cost of around $9 billion a year and that it's well within the government's realm of possibility.

However, ACOSS's call hasn't been heeded and the government has rejected calls from two expert panels for an increase to JobSeeker for everyone on the payment. So, at this stage, it seems the only sort of increase we can expect (if any) is one tailored exclusively for those over 55.

Leaked reports suggest that the government’s proposed $3.70 a day increase to about 227,000 JobSeeker recipients aged over 55. While Treasurer Jim Chalmers refused to confirm or deny these reports, he did declare unemployed women over 55 to be the ‘most vulnerable’ cohort of unemployed Australians.

This controversial proposal, rumoured to be included in the upcoming budget announcement, has garnered its fair share of backlash from welfare advocates and various Labor MPs. Despite Wood being no fan of the proposal herself, she expressed that she wouldn’t begrudge anyone over 55 an increase if that was the final decision from the government.

Antipoverty Centre spokesperson Kristin O'Connell stated, 'Restricting an increase in JobSeeker to people of a certain age is really an attempt to divide us and to encourage people to think that there are “deserving” and “undeserving” welfare recipients.'

Abby Manning, 20, knows all too well what it’s like to live off Centrelink while trying to find work. Last year, she relied on the payment of approximately $33 per day while studying at TAFE for a career in disability support.

‘It definitely was not enough to live on,’ she said. ‘I couldn't afford the basics [and] I definitely couldn't afford my rent’. In the end, Ms Manning was forced to drop out of TAFE and get a job working as an organiser for the Greens in the lead-up to the last federal election.

She is reportedly horrified that her generation of unemployed Australians is being overlooked.

‘I definitely feel like my generation isn't being cared for,’ she said. ‘The government simply doesn't want to prioritise its spending on young people.’

Meanwhile, Carolie O’Connor, 63, has been borrowing money from family members to help pay her bills. Despite the proposed modest increase, every extra bit of JobSeeker payment she receives would still go towards energy and water bills, leaving her far from financially comfortable.

Historically, unemployment payments leaned towards helping younger recipients. However, the number of older Australians on JobSeeker has increased significantly over the past few decades. Member comments on our previous story suggest this could be due to the difficulty of strict eligibility criteria for disability payments.

Women over 55, who once comprised only 2 per cent of recipients in 2001, now make up the largest proportion of JobSeeker recipients at 16 per cent.

The Grattan Institute has put forward their own suggestion which could help offset the cost of such an increase. They suggest the government cancels part of its Stage 3 tax cuts, which are set to come into effect in 2024.

By keeping the 37 per cent tax bracket, rather than scrapping it altogether as previously planned, the government could save around $8 billion a year, consequently offsetting the cost of increasing JobSeeker. As Ms Wood highlighted, 'That alone would offset the fiscal and inflationary impact of a JobSeeker rise.'

Key Takeaways

• A leading economist has warned against creating two classes of welfare recipients by increasing JobSeeker only for Australians aged over 55.
• Grattan Institute CEO Danielle Wood spoke at the National Press Club in Canberra, cautioning against splitting welfare payments based on age.
• The government is yet to confirm reports of a JobSeeker increase for people over 55 in the upcoming federal budget.
• Women aged 55-64 now make up the largest cohort on the JobSeeker payment.
• Advocates argue that everyone on unemployment payments needs a significant increase to lift them out of poverty.
• The decision to increase JobSeeker payments for those over 55 while ‘neglecting younger recipients’ has been met with criticism and feelings of being ignored by the younger generation.
• The Grattan Institute has proposed redesigning the contentious stage three tax cuts, saving around $8bn a year.

So far the government has not commented on this suggestion, but the Labor Party have promised to keep the Stage 3 tax cuts in place.

Age-specific welfare increases could become a complicated, risky factor in Australia's economy and social policy, creating resentment and tension between different generations.

Members, this is a complex and very important issue. But what do you think? Should JobSeeker be increased for all Australians on the payment or just those aged over 55? Is it unfair for younger generations to dismiss the increase for over 55s? Let us know in the comments below.

All Jobseeker recipients need to be paid much more than they are currently getting, for different reasons. Older people, because they are less likely to find employment, and younger people who need a boost to their payments so they can pay for all the jobseeking related items, such as phone access, money for various jobseeking related fares, clothing for interviews and hairdressing. All jobseekers need an increase to assist them with nutritious food for their health, and to pay their ever increasing energy bills and rents. Rental assistance also needs a big boost, it hasn't really changed for years!

 

[Nana Zorak]

As someone who manages my pension to the utmost of my ability, I consider myself reasonably well off as I nearly always have some money left for the unexpected at the back end of the pension fortnight. This is just as well as my stupid funeral plan is now deducting the payment at the end of the fortnight instead of the beginning as they did to start with. My son-in-law who is only 52 misses out on the rise & he hasn't been able to get a job since his boss at the taxi depot closed his business 4 years ago. Mind you my s-i-l is a 3 times survivor of cancer so is very limited in what he can do. This is why he is becoming my carer. He of course doesn't qualify for any form of disability even though he has worked & paid taxes for more than 20 years he also can't touch his Super yet!

 

[Jakepuss]

As Australia prepares for the upcoming federal budget, experts are warning against splitting welfare payments based on age.

In recent days, media reports have suggested the federal budget may include a slight increase to JobSeeker, with the extra money going exclusively to those aged over 55. You can read our report on this news here. But one leading economist recently warned that such an action would be disastrous, setting a ‘dangerous precedent’ in which some welfare recipients aren't treated as equals.

View attachment 19059

Advocates are worried that age-specific welfare increases could cause a rift between generations. Credit: Shutterstock

Danielle Wood, CEO of the Grattan Institute, spoke about the issue at the National Press Club in Canberra on Wednesday.

'I do think it is a bit of a slippery slope, this division of people on those payments,' she said.

'Equally, people under 55 are really struggling to get by.'

These comments came alongside the Australian Council of Social Service (ACOSS)'s calls to increase JobSeeker to at least $75 per day in order to help people meet their basic needs. The council has calculated that this increase would come at a cost of around $9 billion a year and that it's well within the government's realm of possibility.

However, ACOSS's call hasn't been heeded and the government has rejected calls from two expert panels for an increase to JobSeeker for everyone on the payment. So, at this stage, it seems the only sort of increase we can expect (if any) is one tailored exclusively for those over 55.

Leaked reports suggest that the government’s proposed $3.70 a day increase to about 227,000 JobSeeker recipients aged over 55. While Treasurer Jim Chalmers refused to confirm or deny these reports, he did declare unemployed women over 55 to be the ‘most vulnerable’ cohort of unemployed Australians.

This controversial proposal, rumoured to be included in the upcoming budget announcement, has garnered its fair share of backlash from welfare advocates and various Labor MPs. Despite Wood being no fan of the proposal herself, she expressed that she wouldn’t begrudge anyone over 55 an increase if that was the final decision from the government.

Antipoverty Centre spokesperson Kristin O'Connell stated, 'Restricting an increase in JobSeeker to people of a certain age is really an attempt to divide us and to encourage people to think that there are “deserving” and “undeserving” welfare recipients.'

Abby Manning, 20, knows all too well what it’s like to live off Centrelink while trying to find work. Last year, she relied on the payment of approximately $33 per day while studying at TAFE for a career in disability support.

‘It definitely was not enough to live on,’ she said. ‘I couldn't afford the basics [and] I definitely couldn't afford my rent’. In the end, Ms Manning was forced to drop out of TAFE and get a job working as an organiser for the Greens in the lead-up to the last federal election.

She is reportedly horrified that her generation of unemployed Australians is being overlooked.

‘I definitely feel like my generation isn't being cared for,’ she said. ‘The government simply doesn't want to prioritise its spending on young people.’

Meanwhile, Carolie O’Connor, 63, has been borrowing money from family members to help pay her bills. Despite the proposed modest increase, every extra bit of JobSeeker payment she receives would still go towards energy and water bills, leaving her far from financially comfortable.

Historically, unemployment payments leaned towards helping younger recipients. However, the number of older Australians on JobSeeker has increased significantly over the past few decades. Member comments on our previous story suggest this could be due to the difficulty of strict eligibility criteria for disability payments.

Women over 55, who once comprised only 2 per cent of recipients in 2001, now make up the largest proportion of JobSeeker recipients at 16 per cent.

The Grattan Institute has put forward their own suggestion which could help offset the cost of such an increase. They suggest the government cancels part of its Stage 3 tax cuts, which are set to come into effect in 2024.

By keeping the 37 per cent tax bracket, rather than scrapping it altogether as previously planned, the government could save around $8 billion a year, consequently offsetting the cost of increasing JobSeeker. As Ms Wood highlighted, 'That alone would offset the fiscal and inflationary impact of a JobSeeker rise.'

Key Takeaways

• A leading economist has warned against creating two classes of welfare recipients by increasing JobSeeker only for Australians aged over 55.
• Grattan Institute CEO Danielle Wood spoke at the National Press Club in Canberra, cautioning against splitting welfare payments based on age.
• The government is yet to confirm reports of a JobSeeker increase for people over 55 in the upcoming federal budget.
• Women aged 55-64 now make up the largest cohort on the JobSeeker payment.
• Advocates argue that everyone on unemployment payments needs a significant increase to lift them out of poverty.
• The decision to increase JobSeeker payments for those over 55 while ‘neglecting younger recipients’ has been met with criticism and feelings of being ignored by the younger generation.
• The Grattan Institute has proposed redesigning the contentious stage three tax cuts, saving around $8bn a year.

So far the government has not commented on this suggestion, but the Labor Party have promised to keep the Stage 3 tax cuts in place.

Age-specific welfare increases could become a complicated, risky factor in Australia's economy and social policy, creating resentment and tension between different generations.

Members, this is a complex and very important issue. But what do you think? Should JobSeeker be increased for all Australians on the payment or just those aged over 55? Is it unfair for younger generations to dismiss the increase for over 55s? Let us know in the comments below.

The allowance should be graded to the age of the individual
3 different units.
Up to age 30- 60%
Up to age 50-75%
Up to 65 - 90%
Over that,-100%.
I know that once over 50 years old, potential employers don't want to know you, and a tradesman at that. The young lot don't want to work whilst the taxpayer is paying their bills. Just have a look at the "grizzlers" on the TV, tattoos, more rings in their heads than bulls; so as to make themselves unemployable an to a prospective customer; unapproachable. Anyone under 35, just needs to get off their arses and do some WORK.
It will set them free of being a lower class when they appreciate the value of their efforts.

 

[Nana Zorak]

I am so disappointed in Jim Chalmers as treasurer he now is in the elite pay group & has managed to forget the struggles we the poorer part of Australia are going through also Albo as he had a worse upbringing than most in the way of spare money. No detriment to his single mum. Some of us have faced the same thing. But now he certainly is taking advantage of the perks he gets as PM. Just don't forget us the builders of the nation who are now the old ones.

 

[kevinwoodtufftyke52@gmail]

Since when are ' young ' accountants classified as ' experts ? I'm on a pension that I worked for for over 50 years and this pension has never been close to the minimum wage! An ' expert ' is one that has known and understood every aspect of living in this world .

As Australia prepares for the upcoming federal budget, experts are warning against splitting welfare payments based on age.

In recent days, media reports have suggested the federal budget may include a slight increase to JobSeeker, with the extra money going exclusively to those aged over 55. You can read our report on this news here. But one leading economist recently warned that such an action would be disastrous, setting a ‘dangerous precedent’ in which some welfare recipients aren't treated as equals.

View attachment 19059

Advocates are worried that age-specific welfare increases could cause a rift between generations. Credit: Shutterstock

Danielle Wood, CEO of the Grattan Institute, spoke about the issue at the National Press Club in Canberra on Wednesday.

'I do think it is a bit of a slippery slope, this division of people on those payments,' she said.

'Equally, people under 55 are really struggling to get by.'

These comments came alongside the Australian Council of Social Service (ACOSS)'s calls to increase JobSeeker to at least $75 per day in order to help people meet their basic needs. The council has calculated that this increase would come at a cost of around $9 billion a year and that it's well within the government's realm of possibility.

However, ACOSS's call hasn't been heeded and the government has rejected calls from two expert panels for an increase to JobSeeker for everyone on the payment. So, at this stage, it seems the only sort of increase we can expect (if any) is one tailored exclusively for those over 55.

Leaked reports suggest that the government’s proposed $3.70 a day increase to about 227,000 JobSeeker recipients aged over 55. While Treasurer Jim Chalmers refused to confirm or deny these reports, he did declare unemployed women over 55 to be the ‘most vulnerable’ cohort of unemployed Australians.

This controversial proposal, rumoured to be included in the upcoming budget announcement, has garnered its fair share of backlash from welfare advocates and various Labor MPs. Despite Wood being no fan of the proposal herself, she expressed that she wouldn’t begrudge anyone over 55 an increase if that was the final decision from the government.

Antipoverty Centre spokesperson Kristin O'Connell stated, 'Restricting an increase in JobSeeker to people of a certain age is really an attempt to divide us and to encourage people to think that there are “deserving” and “undeserving” welfare recipients.'

Abby Manning, 20, knows all too well what it’s like to live off Centrelink while trying to find work. Last year, she relied on the payment of approximately $33 per day while studying at TAFE for a career in disability support.

‘It definitely was not enough to live on,’ she said. ‘I couldn't afford the basics [and] I definitely couldn't afford my rent’. In the end, Ms Manning was forced to drop out of TAFE and get a job working as an organiser for the Greens in the lead-up to the last federal election.

She is reportedly horrified that her generation of unemployed Australians is being overlooked.

‘I definitely feel like my generation isn't being cared for,’ she said. ‘The government simply doesn't want to prioritise its spending on young people.’

Meanwhile, Carolie O’Connor, 63, has been borrowing money from family members to help pay her bills. Despite the proposed modest increase, every extra bit of JobSeeker payment she receives would still go towards energy and water bills, leaving her far from financially comfortable.

Historically, unemployment payments leaned towards helping younger recipients. However, the number of older Australians on JobSeeker has increased significantly over the past few decades. Member comments on our previous story suggest this could be due to the difficulty of strict eligibility criteria for disability payments.

Women over 55, who once comprised only 2 per cent of recipients in 2001, now make up the largest proportion of JobSeeker recipients at 16 per cent.

The Grattan Institute has put forward their own suggestion which could help offset the cost of such an increase. They suggest the government cancels part of its Stage 3 tax cuts, which are set to come into effect in 2024.

By keeping the 37 per cent tax bracket, rather than scrapping it altogether as previously planned, the government could save around $8 billion a year, consequently offsetting the cost of increasing JobSeeker. As Ms Wood highlighted, 'That alone would offset the fiscal and inflationary impact of a JobSeeker rise.'

Key Takeaways

• A leading economist has warned against creating two classes of welfare recipients by increasing JobSeeker only for Australians aged over 55.
• Grattan Institute CEO Danielle Wood spoke at the National Press Club in Canberra, cautioning against splitting welfare payments based on age.
• The government is yet to confirm reports of a JobSeeker increase for people over 55 in the upcoming federal budget.
• Women aged 55-64 now make up the largest cohort on the JobSeeker payment.
• Advocates argue that everyone on unemployment payments needs a significant increase to lift them out of poverty.
• The decision to increase JobSeeker payments for those over 55 while ‘neglecting younger recipients’ has been met with criticism and feelings of being ignored by the younger generation.
• The Grattan Institute has proposed redesigning the contentious stage three tax cuts, saving around $8bn a year.

So far the government has not commented on this suggestion, but the Labor Party have promised to keep the Stage 3 tax cuts in place.

Age-specific welfare increases could become a complicated, risky factor in Australia's economy and social policy, creating resentment and tension between different generations.

Members, this is a complex and very important issue. But what do you think? Should JobSeeker be increased for all Australians on the payment or just those aged over 55? Is it unfair for younger generations to dismiss the increase for over 55s? Let us know in the comments below.

 

[Mr Chips]

Oh, goody! After working for more than 50 years and paying taxes each year without question, I developed a couple of issues but that's OK. So, now I can go look for a job that young people don't want? I only gave up work after my Diabetes became severe and I had a small surgery to remove part of my foot. Also, I seemed to win a few other issues like acute arthritis, Glycoma, and Cholesterol. So, am looking forward to going out to get a job picking fruit or vegetables or whatever. At 72 years old I am really happy about this (hope I have sufficient walking sticks). I'll see you all at the Centrelink offices for a job application. Does anyone know how much I can earn without losing my only source of income (pension) before the income tax takes it? Have a wonderful day.

 

[Klaus A]

Oh, goody! After working for more than 50 years and paying taxes each year without question, I developed a couple of issues but that's OK. So, now I can go look for a job that young people don't want? I only gave up work after my Diabetes became severe and I had a small surgery to remove part of my foot. Also, I seemed to win a few other issues like acute arthritis, Glycoma, and Cholesterol. So, am looking forward to going out to get a job picking fruit or vegetables or whatever. At 72 years old I am really happy about this (hope I have sufficient walking sticks). I'll see you all at the Centrelink offices for a job application. Does anyone know how much I can earn without losing my only source of income (pension) before the income tax takes it? Have a wonderful day.

You can earn about $200 a week before centerlink takes 50% of every Dollar extra off your pension plus 21 % to the Tax office.