Changes to Superannuation settings may be needed after 2020, but affordable until then, PM Key says

I want to hear the alternatives to National Super.  Because a plan is needed and it needs to be a strong one.  Any change to National Super is only going to go one way, and not to make it more generous.  There are some good alternatives.  How come those don't enter the discussion

In other words:

DonKeeeee : I know I should do something.  I'll pull out the "Further Research" card so it looks like I'm aware that things might be going pear shaped. But by the time the "Further Research"  is in, I'll be retired to Hawaii.....WooHoo... Now maybe they will stop asking me about raising the super age."

one change that needs to come in pronto is that if you work you don;t get it.

that will have a 2 pronged result.

if you give up work then somebody on the dole may be able to come off it by working.and you will recieve super .

eazi peazi

I love the smell of incipient u-turns in the morning.

All we need is the Wagner over the PA and the wokka-wokka sounds.  I'm sure your technical gurus can oblige, BH.

You Know you Want to....

Speech 1:  Not at any time, not ever.

Speech 2: Maybe in the future, if conditions change.

Speech 3   Well it was obviously unsustainable from day one.........

Politicians. Gotta love 'em.

Already the 'net' Super is after the marginal tax rate paid. However, why not double the marginal tax on any Super  payment. Those who are very well off would end up paying pack as tax 60% of their gross  rather than the 30% as now.

They can still choose to work if they wish to get less for it.

Key couldn't possibly do something that needs to be done, if it might make him unpopular.

John Key said yesterday in an interview on morning TV --that NZ spends approx 4% of GDP on Superannuation. Other European Countries spend considerably more ---two countries were spending 12% of GDP on Superannuation.  So we have a long way to go to get to their level of spending and we have the Cullen Fund as an extra softener.

I am especially sympathetic to the Heavy/hard physically workers who are not in good enough condition to work to 67 or 70years. I am also sympathetic to the maori people that are shown to die early and make little demand on the Superannuation Funds.

The point is the each of us that are working and paying taxes has put into the Government Funds as we go through life.  The Government has had the use of this money, from all of us over this time, so theoretically there should be enough money set aside for each and every one of us.  But the reality or it is that our Government uses this money for the countries purposes for all sorts of things.  Some wasted some not.  Very seldom has a previous Government deliberately set aside money into an Investment such as the Cullen Fund for Superannuation.!!

Maybe the Answer is to set up a Special--Superannauation Govt Dept--that handles only Superannuation Money--as taken from Taxes at say 6% of GDP and then Money is Loaned out the Government as required at Commercial Rates---and money is Invested Overseas as available.

Lastly I would like you all to NOTE WELL that the new incoming French Prime Minister during their recent Election, had a stated Policy was that he would reduce the Superann Retirement Age to 61 years --- and he has done this within 2 weeks of moving into Government !!!!!!!

Sorry I was wrong -- France has reduced its Retirement age back to 60years if you started work at 18years.  

They also see an offset in this --they have a high unemployment rate and believe this will bring more people into work at the bottom.

Instead of raising taxes why not encourage more companies to develop our resources.

With a tax rate of 30% this could feed a lot of mony into Government coffers.

Some ideas.

The Oil Industry: There are some Canadian companies here who are finding lots of oil and say that NZ reminds them of North America 50 years ago. ie there is lots of room for them to grow as the industry is so under developed.

Aquaculture: A former ceo of fonterra(Andrew Ferrier) has compared Aquaculture to the Dairy industry and has said that it should aspire to grow to be a lot bigger than $1 billion in annual turnover.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/nelson-mail/features/primary-focus/5968704/Ferrier-worlds-your-oyster

Forrestry: NZ has a wall of wood coming. Create deals with China to process the wood here before it gets shipped oveaseas

Steel: There is almost an infinite amount of low cost iron ore off the west coast of NZ that could be used to create steel slabs. Someone from the Labour party(David Cunliffe) has suggested developing this industry.  

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10767100 

The problem is that there is an anti resource agenda in NZ which slows everything down. Developing Resouces often turns into an unnecessary battle. 

Just because people are living longer, doesn't mean that they are less worn out at 65, than they would be if our life expectancy was less. A 65 year old is still a 65 year old, and can be just as worn out as a 65 year old 20 years ago. 

It goes to show that Key lives for the here-and-now, rather than seeing 10 years ahead.

Forget about the government providing your pension, were better off doing it ourselves, I'd rather pay less tax and have nothing from the government in my old age. There is one thing we can be certain about in guessing what the future will bring and thats,if the government and bureaucrates having anything to do with providing pensions it will be a disaster.

You can already see a disaster on the horizon, treasuray forecasts for 4% GDP growth in the next 3 or 4 years is impossible as with that sort of growth rate the acompanying rise interest rates on the debt will likely double and collapse the system, not only in NZ but across the globe. http://j.mp/L32BnJ

Interesting debate. However, it's all a bit of a red herring. 

When a universal basic income is introduced, superannuation, like welfare, will completely disappear. The concept of superannuation, like many 20th century policies, is outdated and unworkable. 

It's time to move on and start looking at policies, which might actually have relevance fo the future and not the past. 

The problem is to give a safety net to all but also to encourage people to save extra for themselves.

The current super is very generous by international standards. I would suggest setting the level of payout at just above poverty level and making it applicable to all. Anyone wanting more income in retirement has to save for themselves or, ideally, be forced to save a % of income into Kiwisaver.

For this to work, the government must set the Kiwisaver rules in stone so people have confidence that it will not be timkered with when the government wants some more money.

As it stands, I pay the minimum into Kiwisaver and the rest into personal investments which I know I can access at any age.