Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 143647	2017-03-06 09:40:00	For 50+ years I have voted Labour ... but no more !	Misty (368)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
1432545	2017-03-09 00:34:00	I think that the key things are that people are living longer and the cost of superannuation will continue to rise. That is a bit of a simplification but correct enough for the discussion. Now, a decision could probably be put off for twenty years with little repercussion. However, by then, a much more difficult situation will be encountered by whichever government is in power. It could well be that that government would be forced to put the retirement age up to 70, starting with immediate effect at that time. All because the problem had not been faced, because parties wanted to get votes. Putting off the problem only worsens the pain. It does not affect me, but it does affect my kids and grandkids and I want the best of decisions made now, rather than them facing a worse situation later. A government must balance the books reasonably otherwise the country could end up like Greece. Do you know how many cuts Greek pensioners have had to their pensions?? Twelve cuts, yes really !! If you think that is an exaggeration just check.	Misty (368)
1432546	2017-03-09 02:11:00	You are absolutely right misty . There is a problem . It was identified 20 years or more ago . And just like the Christchurch Earthquake Recovery, sweet FA action has been taken to rectify the problem . Lots of Talk but Little Do . It’s pathetic . :(	B.M. (505)
1432547	2017-03-09 02:38:00	I think that the key things are that people are living longer It could well be that that government would be forced to put the retirement age up to 70, Some are. Yes, then what, 75, 80, 85? Thats why it should return to being welfare for those who need it only.	pctek (84)
1432548	2017-03-09 03:05:00	You are absolutely right misty. There is a problem. It was identified 20 years or more ago. ( Try 1975. Dancing Cossacks Labour started a COMPULSORY superan saving scheme . Nats basically cried communists(not a joke) & put an end to it after the next election. Just like some TV comedy sketch , reality worse than fiction. :mad: 20 years from now , will still be all talk no action. Sure we could means test it. But where to draw the line. Anyone who owns a home has an asset value in that home to pay for themselves . As they have to do with before getting some other Welfare payments What about those who hid all their money,home,assets away in trusts & overseas funds. And those who could have saved but choose not to ? Means testing would be loss of votes , its allready been tried & failed. Will never happen for longer than 3 years . Im fully aware I'll need to sell my house to fund my retirement , just to cope with ever increasing cost of living .	1101 (13337)
1432549	2017-03-09 04:13:00	You are absolutely right misty. There is a problem. It was identified 20 years or more ago. And just like the Christchurch Earthquake Recovery, sweet FA action has been taken to rectify the problem. Lots of Talk but Little Do. It’s pathetic. :( Never give up, wrinkly, express your view to your MP. Not many do this, so everyone who does so is (hopefully) listened to more.	Misty (368)
1432550	2017-03-09 04:17:00	Some are. Yes, then what, 75, 80, 85? Thats why it should return to being welfare for those who need it only. Some are, pctek, but to some degree decisions have to be based on this. A bus driver may only live to 68, and because it can be stressful a way must be found for that person to retire earlier. Not easy, but I think even politicians recognise that they have to face the problem at some time. Better now!!	Misty (368)
1432551	2017-03-09 04:20:00	Try 1975. Dancing Cossacks Labour started a COMPULSORY superan saving scheme . Nats basically cried communists(not a joke) & put an end to it after the next election. Just like some TV comedy sketch , reality worse than fiction. :mad: 20 years from now , will still be all talk no action. Sure we could means test it. But where to draw the line. Anyone who owns a home has an asset value in that home to pay for themselves . As they have to do with before getting some other Welfare payments What about those who hid all their money,home,assets away in trusts & overseas funds. And those who could have saved but choose not to ? Means testing would be loss of votes , its allready been tried & failed. Will never happen for longer than 3 years . Im fully aware I'll need to sell my house to fund my retirement , just to cope with ever increasing cost of living . A lot to digest and ponder what you say 1101 - hard to take on board which is your biggest concern. "Sell the house" - maybe sell where you are and move to a lovely place like Whakatane ?? :) I am serious about this.	Misty (368)
1432552	2017-03-09 04:24:00	Try 1975 . Dancing Cossacks Now you mention it I do recall that . 1975 was it? Ok, revise my 20 plus years to 40 plus years and in 20 years time you can revise it to 60 years, because as you say, nothing will have happened, it will still be all talk no do . :groan:	B.M. (505)
1432553	2017-03-09 06:15:00	No I am not sure, but they would be in trouble with the Auditor-General, if they were lying. Perhaps the equities in that spread sheet are just the ones they hold themselves, a larger amount being farmed out to fund managers? Dave, I've downloaded the PDF file of their Annual Report and honestly I have never seen anything as extravagant, despite having and had shares in Blue Chip companies. It really is a must read, so I'll post your link againHERE (www.nzsuperfund.co.nz) for others interested. The first 40>50 pages should read to the tune of "How Great We Art" and then prepare yourself for a minefield of needless nonsense. So far I haven't found what I was looking for, but have found a couple of priceless gems I will share with you. Firstly, they don't believe in underselling themselves. Take a look at their salaries. 7918 and the Tea Lady & Janitor get $100k plus. 7919 7920 And at the end of the day they only showed a 1.9% profit for the year, or so it seems?	B.M. (505)
1432554	2017-03-09 07:45:00	I must say that only reinforces my belief that such bodies exist solely for the benefit of our fat-cat kleptocracy.	KarameaDave (15222)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7