non residents receiving aussie pension

Tingtong

Well-known member
Moo Uaon;212863 said:
^ the "mediterranean back" was in epidemic proportions way back when.

Oz an easy target for SS suckholes from all over the world.
555 the Lebbo Back I was going to write that but didnt want the PC brigade to brand me a Racist 5555
 

Tingtong

Well-known member
What I dont get is, if you can only get the pension if you have been a Aust resident for 30/35 yrs. Why is there a steady stream of Chinese and other obvious foreigners of pension age walking in and out of the Dole offices here.
When I say obvious they are the ones who are the desk with a Interpreter doing the talking for them. I would think after 30 plus years here you could at least speak basic English
 

Moo Uaon

Well-known member
^ they'd be getting some other type of benefit and allowances before retirement age that the locals wouldn't be able to get away with.

30/35 years relates to the aged pension.
 

Tingtong

Well-known member
Yep the system is geared for the blow in's. Ive worked all my life here and been put of from work and cant get any Gov Assistance. Not even the lousy card to get my prescription's discounted . So much for doing the right thing.
 
C

Changone

Guest
I used to think "Pensioners" were all old, how wrong was I....
 

Norabunga

Active member
Tingtong;212889 said:
What I dont get is, if you can only get the pension if you have been a Aust resident for 30/35 yrs. Why is there a steady stream of Chinese and other obvious foreigners of pension age walking in and out of the Dole offices here.
When I say obvious they are the ones who are the desk with a Interpreter doing the talking for them. I would think after 30 plus years here you could at least speak basic English
The 35 year thing is not about getting the pension.
It's about getting the pension whilst living OVERSEAS.
 
Z

Zablive

Guest
Norabunga;212923 said:
The 35 year thing is not about getting the pension.
It's about getting the pension whilst living OVERSEAS.
The number of years is part of the calculation as to how much OAP any person gets.
This restriction came about because many Greek and Italian migrants could get a full OAP here and also a full OAP back "home".

And don't overlook the fact that if you have a Thai wife you will get less than the full single OAP as you have an ineligible partner.
The rate is then 50% of the married rate.
 

justcruzing1

Active member
Norabunga;212869 said:
This is still the case. Nothing to do with actually working or paying tax.
JC is mistaken saying the qualifying period can be at any time of your life.
35 years of your "working" life. i.e. that period of your life you are deemed to be of working age (16 +). 0-15 doesn't count.
Well obviously I was infering you being of working age 16, we don't have kids down the coal mine these days:)

My point was it doesn't have to be in one stint, as I said you can have gone overseas and worked for years, then come back and it continues to accumulate.

Zab I agree it would be politically silly to change anything to existing but it will be bought in for future pensions, won't be in this budget but it will be.

The report into all social security has recommended everything be bought back to just 5 different types. Already the disability pension has been tightened up, and almost impossible to get one now.
Existing pensioners on disability are being called in to have medicals by the department's specialists to determine if they still qualify. They do say no one will be worse off....yea sure.

I have already said I think it's stupid as it will cost the taxpayers more if everyone moves back. Rental assistance, medicare, pension discounts on power and rego etc. but like I said, their thinking is the majority of future expats will still go and the Gov will save the cost of the pension.

Scott Morrison has been given the portfolio to try and get it reduced, welfare, eats up 60% of the nations budget.
 
Z

Zablive

Guest
justcruzing1;212966 said:
Well obviously I was infering you being of working age 16, we don't have kids down the coal mine these days:)

My point was it doesn't have to be in one stint, as I said you can have gone overseas and worked for years, then come back and it continues to accumulate.

Zab I agree it would be politically silly to change anything to existing but it will be bought in for future pensions, won't be in this budget but it will be.

The report into all social security has recommended everything be bought back to just 5 different types. Already the disability pension has been tightened up, and almost impossible to get one now.
Existing pensioners on disability are being called in to have medicals by the department's specialists to determine if they still qualify. They do say no one will be worse off....yea sure.

I have already said I think it's stupid as it will cost the taxpayers more if everyone moves back. Rental assistance, medicare, pension discounts on power and rego etc. but like I said, their thinking is the majority of future expats will still go and the Gov will save the cost of the pension.

Scott Morrison has been given the portfolio to try and get it reduced, welfare, eats up 60% of the nations budget.
Yeah -well they could have banked what we paid in - and not reward unmarried mothers for having kids by whoever - part rant over ...
 

justcruzing1

Active member
^^^ Zab I agree and I have said many times over the years, I believe you shouldn't be able to get anything unless you have paid in.

I know it would never happen but I have advocated for a debit credit type system and where you could leave your credits in your will to someone. Unmarried mothers would have to provide the fathers details and the fathers credits would be rduced by the assistance given.
If the father had no credit's then they would be taken from his parents.

Very quickly the boys that don't care about getting a girl pregnant would suddenly reconsider if it meant' their or their parents future pension was being taken away, also some of these deadbeat parents would pay attention to what their kid was doing if they stood to loos their future pension.

I did get the baby bonus when we had the twins, but that's the only thing I ever got, no 1st home buyers grant, nor reduced stamp duty, no baby bonus for my first two kids and I didn't get the Gillard handout either as I was above their means test.

If you need a gov handout to have a baby you can't afford to have one period. Like saying I'm going overseas for a months holiday but can't afford travel insurance.....get real!!
 

chelski

Active member
JC do you think that what you say about holding male persons parents responsible if the male had no credits and his parents would be responsible for his kids. Remember there are two people involved in making a kid. The girl can say no if she does not want to take a chance as well.
Is not just a one way street in that regard
 

justcruzing1

Active member
^^^ Yes fair point Chelski, it's just a quick summary of an idea I had that has a lot of things that would be unsavory to instigate.

But at some point in time the system here is going to fail, it's not mathematically possible to continue as it is. What happens then???

We are running down the same sort of trouble with Debt and Budgets.
 
C

Changone

Guest

Looking for "Out there" solutions to the cost of aged care?
You only need to look as far as what they are doing with refugees.
Move the OAPS to a third world country and pay their government to take them.
Lots of low cost "Carers" available.
As they are starting to say "The age of entitlement is over".
Couldn't happen...could it?
 
C

Changone

Guest
The difference in the Australian Pension Assets test for a "Home owner" vs someone who doesn't own a home is laughable in terms of today's property prices. About $150K difference in total other assets allowed.

At the same time, a single pensioner can also own up to almost A$1million in assets (Non home owner) other than his own home and still get a part pension.

Is anyone still reeling in dull surprise as to why this country has a sea anchor sized pension bill which is eventually going to take the ship down with it?
Here's what is needed.

People who live in properties worth a million dollars or more should Not be getting a pension full stop.
But they've lived there all there lives. Fine. Stay there. You just won't get a pension as well.
Or sell it and live in a more modest home valued at (Say) a maximum of what first home buyers are limited to. The rest can be converted to a private pension to help keep you.

If you've got between $750,000 and $1,000.000 on assets in addition to your home good luck to you.
But if you want a pension, you should be required to convert all but (Say) up to the deeming limit into a private pension and only be granted any more in the form of an age pension if that doesn't give you enough to reach the normal aged pension amount.

If you've got money in Super? Good on you. Fact is most Australians have less than $250K in Super. If you want a pension your Super should be converted to a private pension first. No lump sums allowed to be kept if you want an age pension unless they are counted at full value.

Tough? You bet. Necessary.? Absolutely.

 

Nomad

Well-known member
^^^ 555 - not

How about if you didn't work hard enough, or make enough money, or pay enough taxes, or save enough for your future, then you get next to nothing back because you didn't kick in enough along the way...you didn't pay your fair share. And if you did pay a motza in taxes, then you deserve to get some benefit in retirement, and not just be told sell the house you worked and saved so hard for.

Tough? You bet. Fairer, absolutely.
 

justcruzing1

Active member
Don't disagree C1 but it's not just the OAP's the attempt by the Gov to reform higher education has to be got thru before any of that.

The medicare co payment doesn't wash now, since they already increased the standard levy by .5% on all taxpayers.

They need to stop large companies from divesting income to offshore parent companies as so called debt repayment, pay the tax then repay the loan.

But we digress.

Any changes in assets assessment needs to be set as not effecting the family home but up to limits that need to be set on a city and area basis. not just a set $1mill, ...$2mill it needs to be based on the average value for a superb, town city etc.
 
C

Changone

Guest
You make a good point, but like most things it ain't fair.
What's your plan then.....?
 
C

Changone

Guest
justcruzing1;213505 said:
Don't disagree C1 but it's not just the OAP's the attempt by the Gov to reform higher education has to be got thru before any of that.

The medicare co payment doesn't wash now, since they already increased the standard levy by .5% on all taxpayers.

They need to stop large companies from divesting income to offshore parent companies as so called debt repayment, pay the tax then repay the loan.

But we digres.

 

jontymate

Active member
Nomad;213504 said:
^^^ 555 - not

How about if you didn't work hard enough, or make enough money, or pay enough taxes, or save enough for your future, then you get next to nothing back because you didn't kick in enough along the way...you didn't pay your fair share. And if you did pay a motza in taxes, then you deserve to get some benefit in retirement, and not just be told sell the house you worked and saved so hard for.

Tough? You bet. Fairer, absolutely.
I think though Nomad our generation (the cusp of defined others) have been educated to plan for a non-governmentally funded twilight years. When I say educated, hinted at, to strongly suggested at best for many in the formative financial years. It is still translational for many of us in our age group. Given today's thinking....That thinking has a dynamic rate that is unsurpassed going forward.

At a minimum the thought (thinking) of paying in (taxes) can not be equated to getting something back. The method and timing of that transition is the only political debate IMO. A government funded pension going forward is welfare for those unable, as you suggest, not an entitlement.

C1 asks what's your plan? Education, financial education, as a part of schooling. I feel that should be a subject encapsulated in social studies or life skills whatever the term is now.

I witness the Chinese kids have a subject that is left over from the hard communist days and the best interpretation is "to love your country" from what they tell me, one facet, they are taught about personal debt and consumption. Not only how that affects them but the country. This is not the answer alone but aspects of it can be considered

As it stands now, those that purchased that little property on the beach, or elsewhere, that has increased in value. They played by the rules of the time. As I said it must be an incremental transition. They have it hard enough paying the rates on a pension. The only fair incentive to downsize.

My children however do not expect anything from the government. They also know I will never be wealthy in a cemetery. The only legacy I will leave my children I hope is pride. The rest I will enjoy with them.
 
Top