# Inquiry into retirement income system



## Jack Malarkey (Jan 11, 2016)

The Australian Government on 27 September 2019 announced an inquiry into the retirement income system:
https://joshfrydenberg.com.au/wp-co...se-Review-of-the-Retirement-Income-System.pdf.

The inquiry is to release a consultation paper in November 2019 and complete its report by June 2020.

It's feasible that the review will consider the superannuation position of participants in the gig economy including rideshare drivers.


----------



## wn100804 (Jun 9, 2019)

wut ?


----------



## UberDriverAU (Nov 4, 2015)

Jack Malarkey said:


> It's feasible that the review will consider the superannuation position of participants in the gig economy including rideshare drivers.


Anyone who is required to do the work personally and has no freedom to set their own rates should be deemed an employee for super purposes. The government is going to have to fund a lot of aged pensions later on down the track unless they do something about the "gig economy" now.


----------



## Krusty (Jan 26, 2018)

Its funny how people think that the government funds things, they don't, the government has no money whatsoever to fund anything so what they do is perform a sleight of hand whereby they take your money and then give it back to you, minus their cut, its a magic trick and most people fall for it.


----------



## UberDriverAU (Nov 4, 2015)

Krusty said:


> Its funny how people think that the government funds things, they don't, the government has no money whatsoever to fund anything so what they do is perform a sleight of hand whereby they take your money and then give it back to you, minus their cut, its a magic trick and most people fall for it.


He who prints the money, has as much money as he wants. Banks and central banks are the creators of money in modern economies. If what you said were true, the money base could not grow, and monetary policy such as "quantitative easing" would not be possible.


----------



## Krusty (Jan 26, 2018)

UberDriverAU said:


> He who prints the money, has as much money as he wants. Banks and central banks are the creators of money in modern economies. If what you said were true, the money base could not grow, and monetary policy such as "quantitative easing" would not be possible.


Its just funny money, counterfeit, bogus government IOU's that can't exist without the backing of the private enterprise productive class, if Governments create money why can't Somalia just print 100 dollar bills and become a rich super state.


----------



## Lowestformofwit (Sep 2, 2016)

Money you have, is/was intended to be your share of the “Common Wealth of Australia” (as inscribed on really old currency).
If that accrued national wealth stays static, then printing more money just decreases the unit value of your ‘share’, and hence its buying power.


----------



## UberDriverAU (Nov 4, 2015)

Krusty said:


> Its just funny money, counterfeit, bogus government IOU's that can't exist without the backing of the private enterprise productive class, if Governments create money why can't Somalia just print 100 dollar bills and become a rich super state.


Fiat money has value because you can use it to settle tax debts. You can't have a tax rate higher than 100%, so a country's economy places a natural limit on the value of a unit of currency. If you simply go crazy with the printing press without commensurate growth in the economy, that's when you get hyperinflation. The point is though, money is created all the time, it's not simply shuffled around the economy as you have suggested.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Jack Malarkey said:


> The Australian Government on 27 September 2019 announced an inquiry into the retirement income system:
> https://joshfrydenberg.com.au/wp-co...se-Review-of-the-Retirement-Income-System.pdf.
> 
> The inquiry is to release a consultation paper in November 2019 and complete its report by June 2020.
> ...


Let us hope
It will not be to announce 
The funds have been misappropriated and the system is broke
Like in America.



Krusty said:


> Its just funny money, counterfeit, bogus government IOU's that can't exist without the backing of the private enterprise productive class, if Governments create money why can't Somalia just print 100 dollar bills and become a rich super state.


Central Banking.

So Wonderful.

The United Nations announced 2 years ago
That " We should All Eat More Bugs"!

So you just Know the World Bank has a Bright Future planned for us all !

( please pass the Soylent Green)


----------



## Jack Malarkey (Jan 11, 2016)

I understand that the review will not be making recommendations as such but will provide a factual basis to inform future decision-making by government.

This article provides a good overview of some relevant issues: https://www.google.com.au/amp/amp.abc.net.au/article/11215512.


----------



## UberDriverAU (Nov 4, 2015)

Jack Malarkey said:


> I understand that the review will not be making recommendations as such but will provide a factual basis to inform future decision-making by government.
> 
> This article provides a good overview of some relevant issues: https://www.google.com.au/amp/amp.abc.net.au/article/11215512.


Some good suggestions in there Jack. Some random thoughts:

(1) Default super funds should be based on performance, not awards/agreements/etc. Dud funds should be wound up and rolled over into better performing funds. 
(2) The family home should be included in the assets test for the age pension. An old lady living in a 4 bedroom $2M property by herself shouldn't be getting the age pension!
(3) Lifetime contribution limits make much more sense than annual limits. It's quite discriminatory against those who spend period(s) of their lives out of the workforce (typically women).
(4) Employers should pay super on every dollar of employee income, not just after $450/month.
(5) Contributions tax is too generous to those who can most afford to pay more tax. Someone below the tax free threshold pays _more_ tax by contributing to super. I reckon contributions should be given a 15% rebatable discount. So someone in the 45% bracket pays 30%, those in the 19% bracket pay 4%, and those in the 0% bracket have the -15% rebated into their super.


----------



## WestSydGuy (Jun 7, 2018)

[QUOTE="UberDriverAU, post: 5449860, 
(2) The family home should be included in the assets test for the age pension. An old lady living in a 4 bedroom $2M property by herself shouldn't be getting the age pension!
[/QUOTE]
What should the old lady do with the 2mil house? Sell a few bricks for the gas bill? Move to a rural town into a cheaper place and leave behind her neighbours, friends and family?

What if the market crashes (likely in the next few months it seems) then will the gov start paying out more pensions? Hmm.

A reverse mortgage might be an option.... but then where would she live? Yes, I agree it's not the most equal of tests at the moment.

To be honest, I'd support a universal basic income, everyone gets the same, no checks, no thousands of beurocrats at Centrelink, and also the gov build some housing commission homes, the UK has 20%+, we have 5%- totally inadequate.


----------



## Krusty (Jan 26, 2018)

Housing commision homes LOL ... the .gov builds 3 homes for every 100 people that need one and then pats themselves on the back for a job well done, give them a 3 man tent instead I reckon, that will give them an insentive to get out there and improve their own lot instead of just putting their feet up and retiring once they get gifted a .gov house.


----------



## UberDriverAU (Nov 4, 2015)

WestSydGuy said:


> What should the old lady do with the 2mil house? Sell a few bricks for the gas bill? Move to a rural town into a cheaper place and leave behind her neighbours, friends and family?
> 
> What if the market crashes (likely in the next few months it seems) then will the gov start paying out more pensions? Hmm.
> 
> A reverse mortgage might be an option.... but then where would she live? Yes, I agree it's not the most equal of tests at the moment.


If the little old lady doesn't want to move out, perhaps her age pension should be funded by the equity in her home. A government operated reverse mortgage? When she passes away, the property gets sold and the loan gets paid back.


WestSydGuy said:


> To be honest, I'd support a universal basic income, everyone gets the same, no checks, no thousands of beurocrats at Centrelink, and also the gov build some housing commission homes, the UK has 20%+, we have 5%- totally inadequate.


A UBI is inevitable at some point I think.


----------



## WestSydGuy (Jun 7, 2018)

An UBI is less than Centrelink staffing costs plus benefits paid currently, so financially it makes sense already. I’m interested to see who greedy landlords and businesses would react however. “Oh, you have $200 extra a week, well, guess what, rents going up” :smiles:


----------



## QBN_PC (Aug 2, 2019)

UBI is an incredibly bad idea in the current economic climate. 

It'd create an immense incentive for people (specifically young men - who will be the backbone of the future economy) to go bush and do absolutely nothing with their lives. You think the welfare system is expensive now? At least the cities could become less congested as people up and leave.

As for super, just stay away from industry funds. They're a tool the union movement uses to amass funds, so their cronies can control enough shares in big corporations to get equivalent voting rights at AGMs. Once they control swing votes at AGMs, they can ram their social policies into society via the back door, regardless of who the people vote for at elections.


----------



## Jack Malarkey (Jan 11, 2016)

On Friday 23 November 2019, the Retirement Income Review released its consultation paper. The review invites submissions until Monday 3 February 2020.

From the Australian Treasury's website:

Date
22 November 2019 - 03 February 2020

Consultation Type: Consultation Paper

Email
[email protected]

Key Documents

Consultation paper 923.91 KB: https://www.treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2019-11/c2019-36292.pdf

Consultation paper 11.16 MB: https://www.treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2019-11/c2019-36292.docx.

The Retirement Income Review consultation paper was released on 22 November 2019.

The consultation paper outlines some of the issues the Panel will be considering and is intended as a guide to those making a submission. The Panel welcomes contributions and invites submissions from the Australian community on the issues and material it should examine as it considers the current state of the retirement income system and how it will perform in the future.

The Panel welcomes responses to the questions outlined in this paper, but submissions need not be limited to these issues. The Panel is interested in receiving input on any issues considered relevant to the Review. Consistent with the focus of the Review on establishing a fact base to improve the understanding of how the retirement income system operates, the Panel requests that submissions identify data or other evidence to support views that are expressed.

(https://www.treasury.gov.au/consultation/c2019-36292)


----------

