Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2013 14:57:15 GMT 7
2 day 2 night just ran a story on australian age pensioners living the high life in barly or some where in south east asia.
|
|
|
Post by Banjo on Feb 22, 2013 15:35:03 GMT 7
Not good news, the corporate media turning on old age pensioners. Thanks for the heads up, I'll check their site.
|
|
|
Post by Banjo on Feb 22, 2013 15:37:26 GMT 7
au.news.yahoo.com/today-tonight/latest/article/-/16210680/retirement-in-paradise/Retirement in paradiseFebruary 22, 2013, 6:18 pmToday Tonight With an ageing population and growing cost-of-living pressures - more and more older Aussies are retiring overseas.
Full time maids. Luxury beachfront villas.. And cheap medical care. Parts of Asia are being turned into Australian retirement villages. "The idea of retiring on a pension or superannuation in Australia is really quite challenging, especially if you live in one of the major capital cities" Perth retirees John and Annie Taylor moved to Bali three and a half years ago and haven’t looked back. "We love it here and we have no intention of going too far," "We love the food here, the people, the culture - just to be able to walk down the beach - we're two minutes from the beach. It doesn’t get any better really" Paula Gilham also moved to Bali to make her retirement money stretch further. "It's nice to have somebody to clean up after you, to do your daily house chores, I did that back in Australia but here I have a nice pool man," he says. It's estimated more than 65,000 Australians are currently receiving their age pension while living overseas. Anyone who has lived in Australia for at least 10 years can receive an age pension of up to $772.60 a fortnight. Recently a 62-year-old man, who spends most of his time in Asia, won the right to keep his disability pension, arguing if he stayed in Australia he'd be forced to live in dire poverty. So called Paradise Pensioners cost the Federal Government around $600 million dollars a year. It might sound like a huge drain on the public purse, but demographer Bernard Salt argues it also takes pressure off our already struggling health system. "I think the bottom line is that Australians who have worked hard all their lives and paid taxes are entitled to retire wherever they wish and they can take that retirement income, the pension or superannuation" "Baby boomers think differently. They have big aspirations, big lifestyles, big expectations, without the money to actually deliver that lifestyle in Australia. The one way around that it is to go to one of these south-east Asian countries, live the high life on a pension or a meagre superannuation and you can live happily ever after" He forecasts rising costs here will force more Australians overseas to retire. It's a trend that took off in the UK in the 80s and 90s, with Britons choosing the Costa Brava in Spain over the Cotswolds. Michael O'Neil CEO of National Seniors Australia - says the cost of living is the most significant issue for older Australians. "I think it's a choice that people need to make really carefully because its one of the big big changes in your life that can take place He says a tropical retirement option is certainly attractive, but does have a downside It might relieve financial pressures, but you're also giving up your social and family networks. As well as top notch medical care. "Perhaps the thing to do is go and do it for three, four or five months. Try it out, try before you buy, test whether you really can be happy in that kind of different community that kind of different cultural environment,” he says.
|
|
|
Post by Banjo on Feb 22, 2013 15:48:08 GMT 7
The whole message is identical to the "JetSet Pensioners" story that was the beginning of the end for DSP recipients living overseas.
Be afraid, be very afraid.
|
|
|
Post by Banjo on Feb 22, 2013 16:01:26 GMT 7
Terry, I'm going to move this thread to the old age pension section and change the name so it gets a bit more attention, thanks for posting it.
|
|
|
Post by hypoman on Feb 22, 2013 18:18:22 GMT 7
yeah - I saw a show a few months back almost the same, but without the govts negative spin. we should never loose our right to live where we want. I reckon the young need to be informed its their right to decide, and they should help fight to retain that right or if they dont spaek out changes could come to OAP there too...
so ts true old age pensioners are a drain on the system are as well as us on DSP.
|
|
|
Post by Banker on Feb 22, 2013 18:22:30 GMT 7
Its a carbon copy of the Jet Set Pensioners out burst. Some of us said at the time that OAP would be the next target. I do not understand why the Government are trying to do this, it just dosnt make sense. Oh yea that's right we are talking about Government here and controlling the people.
|
|
|
Post by peter on Feb 22, 2013 19:55:34 GMT 7
"Pensioners Living In Paradise" was the title and it depends on the viewer how one interprets that.....with a "good luck to them" attitude, or one of envy and resentment. I think for OAP's the sentiment is still very much on the side of "good luck to them".
DSP's were a different issue. The DSP has been rorted so often by pretenders, that the general public is very suspicious about whether those on DSP are genuine or not, and for that reason there was and is a reluctance to let them live offshore. The OAP is different. It is 65, over and out.......a clear cut situation unable to be rorted.
Unless the OAP is seen to be a rort but it is the Commonwealth of Australia which is a common wealth and I do not foresee the OAP being begrudged. Its been around for a hundred years as part of the social fabric. A lot of the newer payments are begrudged but not the OAP.
Mention was made that those who leave give up access to "top notch medical care".........but they did not make the point that it takes the pressure off that system but its only a small step to see that.
They did make the point that high cost Australia is a challenge for the retired and that retiring off shore was a logical thing to do. The present capricious and confused government is soon to go. Thereafter it will be a new government that has shown in the past a willingness to let OAP's offshore.
In 2002, or 2004, the Howard government wanted to increase the AWLR from 25 to 30 years and after pressure against the measure withdrew it. And who was speaking against the measure accusing them of being penny pinching and disregarding the contribution of the OAP"s? It was Wayne Swan who ate his words with glee last year with his increase in AWLR from 25 to not 30 but 35 years AWLR.
One thing I notice in all these changes is the silence of the migrant groups. Once, even as recently as 2,002 they seemed to be a pressure group to be heard, but now silence seems golden for them. No, I cannot see the new government changing the OAP non residency provisions. There is more consistency and level headedness in them than that.
The OAP is the equivalent of what other countris have as Social Insurance, and most western countries have that as exportable. It is not welfare in the sense of " last chance for the down and out" as all developed countries have including the SSI in the USA which has acted as a magnet for the elderly parents of migrant children, but it is not exportable. The Aussie OAP is not the same as the US SSI. and I think a new government will be aware of that and honour that.
Its only a 3.44 minute clip and its covering is not deep.
Or accurate. Who is the DSP reported in the programme, who, at the age of 62 recently won the right to keep his DSP and continue to live in Asia because "he could not afford to live in Australia"?
Well that simply cannot be true. He is either one of those "severely disabled" under the new legislation or his benefit ceases after six weeks. To have errors like this in the three minute snip, shows that it is just a fill in piece.
And I have the feeling that I have seen the scenes in this clip previously, particularly the couple being interviewed as well as the pool lady......but more especially the couple interview.
If its a rerun, they are really hard up considering all the news around at present.
|
|
|
Post by Banjo on Feb 22, 2013 20:18:05 GMT 7
Re: the DSP recipient who regained residency in the AAT, it was discussed here and the full AAT report placed on the forum.
I'm sure that your confidence in the expected Liberal government will give satisfaction and reassurance to many Peter. It will make it all too easy to sit back and do nothing as many did when the DSP portability cuts were touted.
DSPoverseas was asked to contribute to this TodayTonight segment, it's been planned for several months, the correspondence is available if you wish to see it. Latindancer was finally selected to speak to them in person, maybe be interviewed, but we left it too late and our "assistance" went begging.
The key point is the $600 million, do you think Abbott and Hockey will ignore that? Do you think they won't realise that the majority of the Old Age pensioners won't care, there will definitely be envy there and the suspicion that people that want to live overseas/in Asia aren't good Australians and possible "up to something?"
It's about as soft a target as comes along.
So what do you think should be done? Is this DSPoverseas crying wolf again?
Well we've cried wolf before and the was a monster.
Did you vote when you were overseas or was it too much trouble to get to the embassy? Do you think Abbott and Gillard don't know this?
|
|
|
Post by peter on Feb 23, 2013 3:19:47 GMT 7
Concerning the 62 year old man who won the right to keep DSP, because he could not afford to live in Australia,that is misleading in that the inference is that he won the right to keep his DSP and continues to live in Asia. The piece I saw on the board, if I recall correctly, concerned someone who won the right to keep his DSP and live in Australia.
My belief is that governments, and people do things out of priniciple. It is ingrained in me. So its hard to accept that they act not out of principle, but out of bully style tactics, which is take from those who make the least protest, or they act out of bribery through buying votes by catering to those sections that they can buy electorally. Yes, there is a bit of that, but the underlay should be that they act for the good of the country, which is a long term aim, and not a short term reaction to whatever happens in the moment.
It is one thing to look at expenditure of $600 million a year spent overseas and declare that that is a drain. But a second look will show that it is a saving in that it takes another $600 million off the health care budget. The ratio is around for every $1 in direct pension payments, there is another $1 in indirect costs.
So, its in the national budget interest that OAP's be allowed to live overseas. The fact that Swan did not see that when he moved the AWLR from 25 to 35 years, shows what a bad economic manager he and this government is.
Electorally, Ms Gillard made the statement that "pensioners do not vote labor". Well some do of course, but its true that as people become older they become more conservative because they tend to prefer the status quo and have lived long enough to see that gee whiz ideas are not as good as they seem.
This conservative bias has served OAP's badly, in that Howard and Costello took them for granted, and spread the welfare over the more bribeable groups and neglected the OAP group. Labor finally half fixed that neglect with the 2009 review.
It could be said that a conservative government would want them onshore to strengthen their electoral base. But I do not believe they are so sordid, that they would want to break ranks with current Western practice.
Economic management says that allowing OAP's to go offshore, is not a cost of $600 million a year, but a saving of $600 million. That is just economic commonsense and why wouldn"t a conservative government follow economic commonsense?
They already now have a 35 year AWLR rule, which caters to those who view OAP's as undeserving rorters, who should be kept imprisoned to add to the national health care costs. I do not believe Abbot and Hockey would be so foolish. Its a discredit to Swan and Cabinet that this came about, just one more of their many blunders. Where did the initiative for this come from? a blind man in Treasury? And there is no $46 million saving over four year, but just the reverse. The problem with the DSP has been that it has been rorted. It is unpopular with many people for that reason. It lacks a review mechanism to keep it honest. Its a shambles of a system. Good for those who know how to work it. By losing its integrity, it lost its self respect, and we all know what happened.
The OAP is different. The rules are simple just turn 65 and meet the other requirements. It still has its self respect, and an OAP is still a respected status within society.
I think the case of OAP portability, can stand on its own merits. The difference with the DSP is that the DSP portability system lost integrity.So, I think the OAP portability system can stand on its merits without pressure to have those merits recognised.
.............................
And what has happened to all the migrant groups who used to push and push for more portability?
And I still feel that I have seen those interviews last year. Its really an old news topic............... pensioners living abroard to escape high cost Australia is no longer really news.
|
|
|
Post by bundyrum on Feb 23, 2013 3:44:41 GMT 7
Hi.I have a friend here in Indonesia..he said he has to go back to Aussie b 4 ..1 year..that will be June.. I have other mates on OAP..and they seem to just stay here..what's going on? cheers.
|
|
|
Post by bangalorebiker on Feb 23, 2013 5:06:13 GMT 7
yep my same thoughts was that the bastards are about to attack the OAP when i seen it on TV last night.. actully it comes as no surprise to me because my ex local federal MP (labor) told me about the intended changes to DSP about early 2010 and also labors intention of changing OAP these labor bastards keep changing the goal posts. well i just surfed a government web site, and as you all will recall all the bullshit on the media etc etc about the globe trotting DSP's well i just found this,, As at June 2010, there were 71 360 income support recipients residing overseas permanently. The majority (79 per cent) reside in European countries. Of those resident overseas, 62 148 (87 per cent) were receiving AP, 7572 were receiving the DSP, 575 receiving WidB and 969 receiving WP.[2] Annual expenditure as at June 2010 on Australia’s pension payments paid to people living overseas was $571.3 million and at the same time, pensions from overseas countries being paid to people residing in Australia totalled $1.2 billion" 7572 were receiving the DSP" maybe i am just a dumb prick from out the back of whop whop but when the DSP hype was going on it was claimed that the DSP poor buggers were getting millions payed out to them to go globe trotting around the world, load of shit in my opition AND i bet you London to a Brick these bastard policitions do not live on 3 minute noodles or rice for a feed, skimp and save like mad to go overseas to enjoy a better standad of living that we have here in the unlucky country once called australia ? no the like of fat amanda vanderstone (Six Chins i believe to be her chinese name) would die from shock if asked to eat a bowel of 3 minute noodles instead of a 6 course meal. no the dogs in parliment are nipping at the heels of the OAP now since they have got a win over on the poor buggars in wheelchairs etc on DSP, is there not some high court challenge the DSP or OAP recipients can bring against the idiots that make these changes how about "Reason to Show Cause" summons on each of them individually, make it persional, let them feel the heat, waste time fronting court to explain why each of them decided to start ostersizing DSP & OAP recievers, make the bastards sweat, me well i'd just go "point the bone" at the bastards, probly then i'd have free board n lodgings at some jail for threating the policitions with black magic,,, sorry boys i forgot even us blackfellars can not say black in ozzi now so i say "coloured magic" ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by scallywag on Feb 23, 2013 5:21:24 GMT 7
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2013 7:04:21 GMT 7
well it depends on what work you do,lots of us worked blody hard,i did,when i was young like 15 to say 25,when my bones and joints and mussuls were still developing,gave my body hell lifting ,twisting,bending,pulling my joints out of sockets,thats why im fu ed now,and by time i was 48 could not do it any more,and because i was not educated they put me on a lousy pension,and ever since they have been trying to work out a way to get me off it again,BUT if your fit and have never worked your guts out may be you can work up to age 70,and some want to,but its simple if you cant do it then you cant do it,and mind you they dont work as hard now days ,to lift and stack 50 klo when i was working was nothing,now i think you only lift 15,20 klo,but like i said if your fu ed then your fu ed no matter what they say.
|
|
|
Post by eight on Feb 23, 2013 7:20:25 GMT 7
I like what he says here. Of course he's talking about himself and his mates. Mr Abbott says the electorate would understand the reasons for changing the rules. "I mean this idea that you should study until you're 25, and then retire when you're 55 or 60 and then live effectively on the taxpayer for another 30 years it's not a recipe for a productive successful society into the future," he said. Topics:federal-government, government-and-politics, social-policy, australia Fi
|
|