Yay!
The first generation of user pays, Gen X, are now going to have to wait longer to get their Super if National and ACT win the 2023 election!
It’s not enough that Gen Xers had to pay for their own education, it’s not enough that while they were paying that student debt off and Boomers were speculating them out of the housing market, now we are being told that those Boomers are pulling the Super ladder up behind them.
So Boomers speculate Xers out of the housing market, never fucking retire so that Xers can’t progress their careers and NOW they are taking their Super up with them?
Look you Boomers, I know you’ve had it good with your subsided life from cradle to grave, but sweet Jesus there is going to be such a backlash against you the very second Millennials + Gen Y + Gen Xers are a bigger voting black, and that’s predicted to be the 2023 election.
I know you boomers feel pleased as punch to get one past us by electing the Boomer King in Auckland as he privatises assets you won’t be alive to see the consequences of the sale of, but I’m telling you, raise our Super just because you want untaxed capital gains, there’s going to be a political backlash coming for you.
If you are a Gen Xer, you just got another reason not to vote National or ACT!
Increasingly having independent opinion in a mainstream media environment which mostly echo one another has become more important than ever, so if you value having an independent voice – please donate here.
If you can’t contribute but want to help, please always feel free to share our blogs on social media
I think this is an enormous red herring distraction when that was least needed. National want to increase the age of eligibility from 65 to 67 in 2037 ffs!. What are they thinking? Why announce that now during this tight election contest? National stood to gain virtually nothing but risk ruffling the feathers of those aged aged in their early 50’s. What it did do was allow a big distraction when there are already a list of very pressing issues impacting on NZ today…….and of course allow Labour to take the high ground and congratulate themselves for retaining the status quo and smile while giving their nauseating attempts at telling funny stories during their election year conference.
The message being broadcasted to NZ yesterday was Labour ….GOOD……National…..BAD.
National should have waited to have this discussion until in Government. Instead, they shot themselves in the foot…..again
I’m picking you’re a Labour voter. What with the advocating for complete policy dishonesty and everything.
This super age increase was once Labour policy of course until re election became their only motive.
Nats are just being honest about what they will do in office.
He pua pua and 3 waters say hi.
Keepcalmcarryon,
You picked wrong. Honesty and politics in the same sentence? I’m picking you believe in the tooth fairy. Did you miss the part of my post about Labour MP’s and their nauseating attempts at telling funny stories? Is that the usual way Labour voters speak about Labour MP’s? National need not worry about winning the 2037 election. It’s the 2023 version they need to win and I hope they do. Labour are a train wreck. My comment relates to tactics and what National stood to gain by putting superannuation in 2037 on the table at this time? It’s been a very predictable distraction from Hate speech, Health, Crime, Housing, He pua pua and 3 waters etc etc…..and it gifted the left wing loonies the chance to take the high ground.
Means test Super.
Super is funded by the contributions made from taxes made during the working life, just like a private superannuation scheme, it comes to maturity at a time agreed -upon 65 years. It’s very welcome at this age, especially to those who have been in heavy or otherwise difficult work.
Except it’s not pre-funded .
Keep it at 65 tho .
Yes, let’s means test Super, so that the people who worked hard, paid lots of tax and saved get nothing when they retire.
If you wish to destroy a country, there’s nothing like creating a disincentive for working and saving.
Universal Basic Income for all from birth. Up to 18 held by government and invested. YP gets this ‘nest egg’ at 18 rather than the prospect of student loan for tertiary learning or for investing where they choose.
Other policy changes that fit with this – fulltime working week reduced to 4 days or 32 hours – Work & Income already define fulltime work as this.
Government Super at 60. No means testing.
Free Health and Dental.
Funded by progressive taxation along with CGT. Also funded by savings in administration for welfare – job losses at Work & Income.
Never understood Labour that the youth will lose 198K in their retirement?
Why do they always look at one side – politics I guess.
If you work for two more years you will have more for your retirement.
All parties would have been better advertising how important Kiwisaver is to youth or how about a tiny amount of student loan is topped up to commence kiwisaver for them as the start compounds amazingly with dollar cost averaging.
When someone announces such a policy why not look at positives around the area at some stage instead of on the fly scathing.
You miss the point that you are able to continue to work after you start getting super. So there is nothing to stop this, what are you on about?
Also – you are asking politicians to see ahead of the next election. We need to extend our parliamentary terms from 3 to either 4 or 5 years ASAP
Great point – but I guess can everyone continue work being the argument? I think below (if shown) in reference to life expectancy needs to be discussed.
It is the 2 fewer years to enjoy retirement & whatever the % is that will die between 65 & 67 years that are the issues with raising the retirement age.
Good we talk about this, I think more in terms of reality with life expectancy rising.
In 1938 the NZ public pension started and while I don’t know the retirement age then our life expectancy has changed from 1950 to 69.22, today 82.8, 2037 when they want to rise it is expected to be 84.75.
Seriously – something has got to give to be able to afford this in future?
How many Generation Xers are worried about a plan that won’t even take full effect till about 2044. In short you have to be 46 today before the age of 67 applies. Someone who is 55 today would get superannuation at age 66 under National’s plan.
In any event, do voters make their voting decision on what happens in 20 years time, or are their concerns rather more immediate than that?
It simply needs to be gradualised -so past the age of 62 you get a third of super, then at 65 two thirds and at 67 you get the full amount, raising the age for all is simply unfair for many and giving less out earlier helps (say) previous manual workers or those with poorer health transistion to gradually to partime status. However, the way costs are going up & the automation of work means we’ll have to look again at the UBI before gen X near retirement age.
Martyn you raised a valid point.
This will affect Gen X and others absolutely.
They need to remember this when they cast their vote this year.
But not all Boomers had it good. I agree some in that group did though.
I am from blue collar low working class. I sit exactly at the crossover zone between GenX and Boomer and I don’t remember handouts (although some older than me got cheap State Advance loans and support etc).I remember all Govts of the day messing and lying to voters plus extreme experiments with policies.
I remember high interest rate for mortgages, low wages, Rogernomics, Ruthanasia, Muldoon etc.
Younger voters must strongly critique our politicians and try to keep them accountable.
Perhaps that is one thing about social media and the like as it gets in politicians faces plus pushes for more transparency.
I agree Thinking-Man, something fishy going on here with the use of red herring distractions etc. You raise an excellent point.
Hold on the French are up in arms about it going from 60 to 63 aren’t they. So the entitlement age should be coming down.
Increasing the age is the sensible thing to do, as Labour thought as recently as 2014.
I will be directly impacted by this change, but because it is for the good of the country, I support it.
This is simply partisan nonsense from you.
The Australian government has moved it to 67 over a similar period . A cut in tax will put more money in the pocket of those due to retire so they could still retire at 65 or even earier if it is what they want to do. Fewer and fewer people are actually retiring at 65 now .If you enjoy your job it is better for your health especially mental health to keep in the work force.
Vote National and be screwed later. ps. they (National) have a track record for wrecking superannuation.
Firstly super is the BIGGEST welfare spending there is in government.
Instead of trying to get it down, successive governments have given away free NZ pensions to incoming foreign pensioners.
Chinese pensions…
Guess what, in China you have to CONTRIBUTE minimum 15 years to get a pension and only get 1% of the indexed wage in China for your public pension.
http://www.oecd.org/els/public-pensions/PAG2017-country-profile-China.pdf
In India it sounds like no free public pension and minimum 10 Years of CONTRIBUTIONS of 12% and only 12% of the work force seemed covered for pensions anyway.
http://www.oecd.org/els/public-pensions/PAG2017-country-profile-India.pdf
In NZ you don’t have to contribute at all to a pension as an overseas person or be working, just be resident here for 10 years (used to be 5 years) to get 43 per cent of the NZ average wage and it is not means tested for overseas pensioners either.
Apparently their are 59,500+ Asian aged pensioners, (already more than the amount of Maori pensioners at 48,500+) – Foreign pensioners can even marry other pensioners and bring them into NZ after an online romance. https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/376220/10k-11-days-and-one-failed-deportation – this means that aged migrant numbers are expected to triple to 171,900+ in 15 years… against Maori aged pensioners who are 109,400 in 15 years…
Now the same people who are expected to pay much of the taxes (Gen X), didn’t get any free student years but expected to pay KiwiSaver while supporting those who have just arrived in the last decade and paid no/little tax for their pensions (shows the neoliberals – give to the rich, take from the hardworking professionals, while rising taxes for the hardworking professionals). Gen X also told there is probably going to be means tested pensions going forward, so you work hard, don’t get free education, don’t get free pension – why bother to upskill – gen y and z.
All the incentives are wrong in NZ to try and get a healthy, fair society of working and taxpaying people. It rewards those outside of NZ taxes and work.
Could hardly be worse if we were being run by an overseas entity which is paid for the task – like contracting out to mercenaries – or are we actually? And how is Health going to get on – it has been detached from the Public Service by the reforms. Devious gummint?
The decrease in the size of the workforce in 2022 was driven by a number of factors. The largest change related to machinery of government changes arising from the Health Reforms. The Ministry of Health had 769 fewer FTEs than last year, rather than around 140 FTEs more, due to functions moving to the new health entities that will be outside the Public Service on 1 July. Without these, machinery of government changes, the annual growth in the size of the Public Service workforce would have been around 0.3%, rather than a decrease of 1.2%. (FTEs – full-time-equivalents – (many are on ‘piece work’).
https://www.publicservice.govt.nz/research-and-data/workforce-data-public-sector-composition/workforce-data-workforce-size/
Vote National and be screwed later.
Had enough of this “generation __ victims” lazy journalism.
Every generation “gets screwed” in some way.
By letting them divide us in those artificial “generations” we are all screwed much more.
Divided we keep falling.
Not sure it’s wise increasing the age of superannuation. Considering how Covid-19 affected elderly people, it’s appropriate to retain the retirement age of 65. Plus there’s also other sicknesses prevalent in society which affect the elderly more so than younger demographics.
For people who don’t know what their letter code is –
The “silent generation” are those born from 1925 to 1945 – so called because they were raised during a period of war and economic depression. The “baby boomers” came next from 1945 to 1964, the result of an increase in births following the end of World War
II.16/01/2019
Millennials, Gen X, Gen Z, baby boomers: how generation …
image.png
The Conversation
https://theconversation.com › millenn
Green fields, farmer Brown. what cost you say,, your bottom paddock,, acre,, million their need say, afford a home. What noddy purchase,, baby jerry.
Comments are closed.