That's a headline from the NBR, March 27. The NZ Initiative has helpfully circulated the article in its weekly newsletter.
His comments explain why he backs the PM's promise not to raise the age of Super qualification.
Not very well.
There are costs and associated behaviour that can be changed. He uses the example of inter-generational welfare dependence. National is making those costs its focus.
Ageing, on the other hand is a fact.It's an unavoidable demographic change. So the PM made his promise and ensured National could avoid, "wasting any time in retirement commissions ...or arguing retirement policy".
That's a cop-out. All National need do, to save billions that could be spent on the increasing costs of aged healthcare (thus avoiding raising tax on the general population) is make raising the age of entitlement an election policy. There are policies being implemented in the US, the UK and Australia which provide a policy framework basis.
Then they get a mandate by winning the election.
5 comments:
I understand the argument for increasing the age of entitlement but where do you stop?
It looks certain that older people are going to become fitter and live much longer over time.. are we going to keep increasing the age till something like 75-80?
Seems to me the workforce doesn't need old farts who lost the ability to strive and innovate sometime around 60 to clog up the job market.. particularly as work becomes more technical and computer driven.
Along with health I'd like to see more effort put into reducing Govt spending and tax and putting the onus more on individuals to cover themselves.
JC
We are always hearing about how Old Age Pension fund is going to run out of money.
How come we never hear about welfare running out of money?
Remember, the first group worked for their money, the second didn't!
Labour lite will never have the courage to tackle this thorny issue. Nor under "populist" JK, anyway.
JC,
"...are we going to keep increasing the age till something like 75-80?"
Index to life expectancy:
"The state pension age is already due to increase from 66 to 67 by no later than April 2028. In future, that date would rise automatically as life expectancy rises."
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/094b89c0-4d12-11e2-a99b-00144feab49a.html#axzz3Vdq5Y39U
I understand the argument for increasing the age of entitlement but where do you stop?
When super is gone. dun.
Labour lite will never have the courage to tackle this thorny issue. Nor under "populist" JK, anyway.
Well right. Especially as this pretty much lost Labour not-lite the last two elections - remember?
Really though when you're 70 billion dollars in debt, have been borrowing a billion for every month of JK's government, the right thing to do is just stop paying the super. Nothing will teach people they can't rely on the government more than just stopping paying super & pensions & welfare.
Post a Comment