[Aquired Taste]

By the way I was amazed to hear of the salary of a senior public servant was $400,000 per year and attracted a 15.5% super contribution. That's $62,000 per year. No wonder the country is going broke.

 

[Zemo]

Hope your letter was more coherent than your post, so the minders might read it rather than bin it out of hand.

Rather, it'd make their day.
This kind of letter, if it ultimately reaches the one it's meant to reach, simply reinforces the mindset of those safe-in-their-jobs public servants in power over us. "Let 'em eat cake!"

 

[Aquired Taste]

Look at all the morons blaming the current government as if this all started recently.

The way the pension works hasn't changed much for years, you lose 50 cents in the dollar over set limits, those limits increase regularly. This has been going on for as long as I can remember, through BOTH flavours of government.

Yeh but the current mob have been in power for the last four years and things are now worse than they were and they haven't done a thing except let students of their hex fees.

 

[Reet]

After receiving treatment for breast cancer when I was 67 I returned to casual work rather than full-time work. I had assumed that I would put in a Tax Return at the usual time declaring my income. That was not the case. I received a letter from the ATO stating that I should have declared my income for the week straight away and demanding what amounted to one day's pay from the five days I had worked. I didn/t work a full day on any of those days but part of each day from 9.00am to 4.00pm I found out later that if I had declared my income straight away I would have paid less as they had, in fact, added a penalty on to the tax for not reporting it straight away.

 

[Reet]

I’m sure the Gov don’t read anything the people send them, they have assistants to read mail and only pass on good stuff. Letters we send are probably regarded as from just another whinger and binned.
Gov would like to see everyone on an age pension curl up and die! How often do you see the people complain who have never worked a day in their lives have numerous kids and rely on the Gov to support them ? Gov should go after them instead of pensioners!

I agree with you wholeheartedly

 

[Nantes]

Hi people I have sent this article to the treasurer Jim Chalmers we need more people to send it then maybe he might read it acting on it might be a different storie no point sending it to ALBO he’s to thick to understand it email [email protected]

Waste of time sending it to the Snake Charmer.

 

[RobbyNotTheRobot]

The reply I got from the MP was that Australia's pension system is 'the best in the world'

Yeah, best for who?

 

[Knell]

This article is highly misleading IMO. Note the main source - newshub/medianet - basically a PR company used by those who choose to push an agenda - not real journalism and IMO not fact checked. I see it as ‘someone’ selling something and/or selling a thought process (and/or paid to do so - imo misleading). The example of ‘Margaret’ and the wording of taxing 60-80% of earning is misleading (imo).
Age Pension: $30,600
Job income: $20,000
Work Bonus: Up to $11,800/year (as of 2023–24; it's actually $300/fortnight + $4,000 one-off credit buffer). So, only $8,200 of the $20,000 would count as assessable income.
Pension reduces 50¢ per dollar over the income threshold ($204 per fortnight for singles = $5,304 annually).
So, roughly:
$8,200 (assessable earnings) – $5,304 (threshold) = $2,896
$2,896 × 0.50 = $1,448 reduction in pensionThis
This is much lower than what the article implies. They suggest a net loss of $12,600 from her $20,000 income (i.e. only keeps $7,400). That could only happen if there are other circumstances that are not disclosed in this article.
So there’s some sleight of hand going on—either by using an extreme example, or by not being transparent with the assumptions. Your pension is reduced if you earn more than the thresholds however there are rather generous bonus incentives to earn and keep below the threshold if you choose to do so. I cannot reconcile those figures as stated in the article.
With a balanced view you might consider a person (non pensioner) earning a basic minimum wage eg $50,000/year pays roughly $6,000–7,000 in income tax and Medicare levy. They do not receive a pension, rent assistance, or concessions (in most cases) and they face similar or worse cost-of living pressures. They get no Work Bonus, no taper — just straightforward tax and no safety net if they scale back work.
So while pensioners might lose part of their pension if they earn more, they are still in a privileged position compared to many low-paid workers.
This article presents the issue from a self-interested perspective, suggesting that any reduction in the Age Pension is punishment, while ignoring that most Australians get no safety net at all unless they qualify for welfare - and even then, it's modest. I suggest people not believe everything put in front of them - fact check so you can get an informed opinion and not a questionable view that is put under your nose, such as articles like this. Check sources and look for an agenda for those who wish to pull the wool over eyes (and benefit from that, in one way or another)…in my opinion.

 

[Margwhit57]

Yes. Last FY23/24 I was on carers payment which was untaxed. I worked 11 hours a week and got all my tax back. When I became 67 I changed to age pension not knowing this was taxable and was still working 11 hours a week. It was a shock to learn I have to pay over $4000 in tax. I have now asked work to tax me more. I can’t afford not to work as I still have a mortgage. The age pension should be untaxable.

 

[Knell]

Yes. Last FY23/24 I was on carers payment which was untaxed. I worked 11 hours a week and got all my tax back. When I became 67 I changed to age pension not knowing this was taxable and was still working 11 hours a week. It was a shock to learn I have to pay over $4000 in tax. I have now asked work to tax me more. I can’t afford not to work as I still have a mortgage. The age pension should be untaxable.

No, it has always been taxable or for the last 20-25years anyway. You actually can earn more after retirement age i.e. you can earn more after retirement age before it attracts tax.

 

[Aquired Taste]

Yeah, best for who?

And how did they work that out ? Cost of energy, rent, groceries. I don't think so.

 

[steamyjack]

I've sent a copy of the article to several MPs plus Chris Minns and copied it to my NSW branch of the Australian Democrats who've reformed with the view to again keeping the Bastards honest.

 

[Zemo]

I've sent a copy of the article to several MPs plus Chris Minns and copied it to my NSW branch of the Australian Democrats who've reformed with the view to again keeping the Bastards honest.

In essence, "keeping the bastards honest" means that they have to become one of the bastards themselves ...

 

[steamyjack]

In essence, "keeping the bastards honest" means that they have to become one of the bastards themselves ...

If they managed to get seats in the Lower House certainly they'd have to become 'honest' bastards. Nothing wrong with being an 'honest' bastard,Zemo,often they're the only ones to get things done.