Australian Politics Forum - At Risk Under The Coalition Super Proposal

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 49368 At my desk.	Re: At Risk Under The Coalition Super Proposal Reply #15 - Jan 18^th, 2025 at 10:44am That's true Bobby, but the same thing happens outside of super. The difference with super is that there is a lot of additional costs associated with compliance. Only some of this is on the government side. A lot of it is accountants and pen pushers in the fund managers filling out paperwork.
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

Bobby.

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 106416
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: At Risk Under The Coalition Super Proposal
Reply #16 - Jan 18^th, 2025 at 11:12am

freediver wrote on Jan 18^th, 2025 at 10:44am:

That's true Bobby, but the same thing happens outside of super. The difference with super is that there is a lot of additional costs associated with compliance. Only some of this is on the government side. A lot of it is accountants and pen pushers in the fund managers filling out paperwork.

Just feel lucky if you can get 90% of your money back.

Back to top

IP Logged

Dnarever

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 59082
Here
Gender: male

Re: At Risk Under The Coalition Super Proposal
Reply #17 - Jan 18^th, 2025 at 12:25pm

freediver wrote on Jan 17^th, 2025 at 8:15am:

Quote:

The reduction of 3 per cent in compulsory employer-paid superannuation

Great idea. Compulsory super is a huge waste of money. The compliance paperwork alone costs each worker at least $1000 a year, and that's if you go with the cheapest option available and do all the investing and most of the paperwork yourself. On top of that, they pay a huge amount of additional interest on their mortgage because they do not have access to their own income.

Quote:

The compliance paperwork alone costs each worker at least $1000 a year

The difference in compliance effort or costs between 9% and 12% is zero.

Quote:

they pay a huge amount of additional interest on their mortgage

Removing 3% from peoples super and giving it to the employer has no impact on mortgages at all it just takes around $165,000 out of their retirement income with zero pay back or advantage of any type.

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49368
At my desk.

Re: At Risk Under The Coalition Super Proposal
Reply #18 - Jan 18^th, 2025 at 12:47pm

Quote:

Removing 3% from peoples super and giving it to the employer has no impact on mortgages at all it just takes around $165,000 out of their retirement income with zero pay back or advantage of any type.

Super does not come out of your employers pocket. It comes out of your pocket. Companies did not take the 10% super out of their profits as an act of charity. Only fools think super is free money.

Quote:

The difference in compliance effort or costs between 9% and 12% is zero.

Incorrect.

Also, what about the losses incurred because you have to spend an extra 10 years paying off your mortgage because the government does not allow you to access your own income? Or because you have less choice in how you manage your finances?

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Jasin Gold Member Offline Posts: 49342 Gender:	Re: At Risk Under The Coalition Super Proposal Reply #19 - Jan 18^th, 2025 at 12:56pm The concept of the Superannuation Industry was to create a new industry that created more jobs in the face of higher unemployment. It worked. The Public paid for it. If something like a massive Economic collapse happens, like the Great Depression. Everyone will lose their Supers in a nano second.
Back to top	AIMLESS EXTENTION OF KNOWLEDGE HOWEVER, WHICH IS WHAT I THINK YOU REALLY MEAN BY THE TERM 'CURIOSITY', IS MERELY INEFFICIENCY. I AM DESIGNED TO AVOID INEFFICIENCY. IP Logged

Frank Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 47525 Gender:	Re: At Risk Under The Coalition Super Proposal Reply #20 - Jan 18^th, 2025 at 1:04pm freediver wrote on Jan 18^th, 2025 at 10:26am: Are you trying to make a point Frank? Yes. Wages are related to productivity. Savings are related to wages.
Back to top	Estragon: I can’t go on like this. Vladimir: That’s what you think. IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 49368 At my desk.	Re: At Risk Under The Coalition Super Proposal Reply #21 - Jan 18^th, 2025 at 1:07pm Frank wrote on Jan 18^th, 2025 at 1:04pm: freediver wrote on Jan 18^th, 2025 at 10:26am: Are you trying to make a point Frank? Yes. Wages are related to productivity. Savings are related to wages. Of course it is related. By definition. Wages are one way of measuring productivity.
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

Bobby.

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 106416
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: At Risk Under The Coalition Super Proposal
Reply #22 - Jan 18^th, 2025 at 1:11pm

Jasin wrote on Jan 18^th, 2025 at 12:56pm:

The concept of the Superannuation Industry was to create a new industry that created more jobs in the face of higher unemployment.
It worked. The Public paid for it.

If something like a massive Economic collapse happens, like the Great Depression. Everyone will lose their Supers in a nano second.

What if all your super is in the bank ? -

you hold no shares etc.

Back to top

IP Logged

whiteknight

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 8303
melbourne
Gender: male

Re: At Risk Under The Coalition Super Proposal
Reply #23 - Jan 18^th, 2025 at 1:35pm

“The Coalition members suggesting a reduction in the superannuation guarantee are very happy to continue to receive 15.4 per cent superannuation for their own retirements. The Coalition’s hypocrisy is unbelievable – they want to enjoy the benefits of super for themselves while robbing working people of it. Sad

Back to top

IP Logged

Dnarever

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 59082
Here
Gender: male

Re: At Risk Under The Coalition Super Proposal
Reply #24 - Jan 18^th, 2025 at 1:58pm

freediver wrote on Jan 18^th, 2025 at 12:47pm:

Quote:

Removing 3% from peoples super and giving it to the employer has no impact on mortgages at all it just takes around $165,000 out of their retirement income with zero pay back or advantage of any type.

Super does not come out of your employers pocket. It comes out of your pocket. Companies did not take the 10% super out of their profits as an act of charity. Only fools think super is free money.

Quote:

The difference in compliance effort or costs between 9% and 12% is zero.

Incorrect.

Also, what about the losses incurred because you have to spend an extra 10 years paying off your mortgage because the government does not allow you to access your own income? Or because you have less choice in how you manage your finances?

You a naive enough to believe that when the business stops paying 3% into super that they will just give it to you. That is a million to one mugs bet. They will put everyone's 3% straight into their own pockets.

Quote:

you have to spend an extra 10 years paying off your mortgage

The employer keeping an extra 3% of your super does not have an impact on your mortgage.

Super paying home loans is a different policy and losing 3% of super makes it more difficult not easier.

Back to top

IP Logged

Bobby. Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 106416 Melbourne Gender:	Re: At Risk Under The Coalition Super Proposal Reply #25 - Jan 18^th, 2025 at 2:05pm If super is allowed to be used for buying houses then the prices will go up - so no one will be better off except the sellers. It's all about supply and demand. With Labor bringing in millions of immigrants when there is nowhere to live creates huge demand.
Back to top	IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49368
At my desk.

Re: At Risk Under The Coalition Super Proposal
Reply #26 - Jan 18^th, 2025 at 2:16pm

Quote:

You a naive enough to believe that when the business stops paying 3% into super that they will just give it to you. That is a million to one mugs bet.

Eventually, they will have to. Remember, market forces determine your salary.

Quote:

It's all about supply and demand.

Duh. And if every other employer in town can suddenly afford to pay their staff 3% more while you pocket the difference, what do you think will happen?

Do you think that employers donated the 10% to you out of some kind of charity, or do you think it came out of your salary?

Bobby. wrote on Jan 18^th, 2025 at 1:11pm:

Jasin wrote on Jan 18^th, 2025 at 12:56pm:

The concept of the Superannuation Industry was to create a new industry that created more jobs in the face of higher unemployment.
It worked. The Public paid for it.

If something like a massive Economic collapse happens, like the Great Depression. Everyone will lose their Supers in a nano second.

What if all your super is in the bank ? -

you hold no shares etc.

You still have to do the compliance paperwork Bobby. Or rather, someone else does it for you and takes it out of your super balance.

And you still have to pay off your mortgage while you have a pile of money sitting in the bank doing nothing.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 47525
Gender: male

Re: At Risk Under The Coalition Super Proposal
Reply #27 - Jan 18^th, 2025 at 3:19pm

whiteknight wrote on Jan 18^th, 2025 at 1:35pm:

“The Coalition members suggesting a reduction in the superannuation guarantee are very happy to continue to receive 15.4 per cent superannuation for their own retirements. The Coalition’s hypocrisy is unbelievable – they want to enjoy the benefits of super for themselves while robbing working people of it. Sad

You can voluntarily contribute 15.4% of your income to super. The before tax cap is $30k p.a. that means you can save an additional $30 And pay only 15% tax on it, instead of 30% or more.

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged