Running Out Of Money, is your pension secure?

[Dr. Shiva]

Are you all sure that the pensions from military or goverment are secured in the future? In many countries the amount of workers per pensioneers are shrinking constantly. In Switzerland will the pension pool being empty between year 2030 and year 2035. And I have some reasonable fears that they will cut down the pensions. And I believe that similar things will happens in other countries as well. I doubt that there will be better solutions around (ex: higher goverment taxes or pension funding will not work well. In the first it will eats the bigger pensions with bigger taxes and the second will lower the available salary while working.

 

Edited into new topic. Great question from Dr S.

Edited December 6, 2017 by Old55

[GeoffH]

I cannot speak as to what other countries are attempting with regards to this issue but some years ago Australia introduced 'compulsory industry superannuation' where a percentage of wages is required to be submitted by the employer to an approved superannuation fund. 

This money is then available for a 'pension type' income after retirement, in fact my pension is actually a superannuation pension income stream (money my employer contributed plus some voluntary extra contributions from myself) and not a government pension.  * #

In addition they are actively working to tighten access to government pensions by making asset and income tests stricter.

Both of these will act (in theory) to reduce the numbers of people who are able to access a government pension.

I can only assume that other western governments have their own strategies in place to deal with the issue (or at least one would hope so!)

 

* The issue of 'superannuation income streams' (or superannuation allocated pensions as they are sometimes called) was a question I raised with regard to the SRRV however I was told it was unlikely that my superannuation pension would qualify as a pension and that was one of the reasons I did not proceed with an SRRV application (only one though).

# The government offer reduced taxation for income voluntarily placed into approved superannuation funds to attract extra contributions and they are also restrict by law at what age, what working status and how much money per year one can withdraw so as to not allow people to withdraw unsustainable amounts each year.

Edited December 6, 2017 by GeoffH

[Dr. Shiva]

Where is the rest of this thread? Was it accidentally deleted? I see a note that my post was moved into a new thread but where is the old thread?

[Old55]

Sorry Dr. S I should have made it clearer. Your question statement although in context to the topic you posted to was important enough to split into a topic of its own. It’s an important consideration to most members here.

Regards Dan ( Old55)

[Clermont]

This has been a question that has been going on for over twenty odd years about lowering Pensions, restricting Pensions for expats overseas and money going out of the country in different forms of government recipient payments.

Now, I look at it this way: Australia pays expats( people not living in Australia, ) some form of government payment to the tune of 700 million dollars per year, that was the last I heard before losing interest. Well, that equates to a lot of people out there living their dream and if they cut the money off to them people, where would they go, back home of course.

Problem: most have health issues, old, can't live on their pension back home. So the wise ones ( I say that with tongue in cheek ) have let it fall of the radar screen because, here in Oz we have medicare, old age people's homes, carer's services and services that you couldn't imagine would be needed. Who is going to pay for these services, the Government of course. Oz has put itself on a world pedestal of human rights and if they don't look after their elderly citizens, they can't dictate their views. (Sorry for politics coming into this, ) So drink up, live your dreams and don't worry.  Be jolly and don't put a damper on this jolly old fellows spirit.

 

[sonjack2847]

I think that a lot of the problem is that there are too many people who don`t work who could.The UK government took money from the pension fund and spent it.I am trying not rely on a UK pension in 10 years time.

[mogo51]

2 hours ago, GeoffH said:

I cannot speak as to what other countries are attempting with regards to this issue but some years ago Australia introduced 'compulsory industry superannuation' where a percentage of wages is required to be submitted by the employer to an approved superannuation fund. 

This money is then available for a 'pension type' income after retirement, in fact my pension is actually a superannuation pension income stream (money my employer contributed plus some voluntary extra contributions from myself) and not a government pension.  * #

In addition they are actively working to tighten access to government pensions by making asset and income tests stricter.

Both of these will act (in theory) to reduce the numbers of people who are able to access a government pension.

I can only assume that other western governments have their own strategies in place to deal with the issue (or at least one would hope so!)

 

* The issue of 'superannuation income streams' (or superannuation allocated pensions as they are sometimes called) was a question I raised with regard to the SRRV however I was told it was unlikely that my superannuation pension would qualify as a pension and that was one of the reasons I did not proceed with an SRRV application (only one though).

# The government offer reduced taxation for income voluntarily placed into approved superannuation funds to attract extra contributions and they are also restrict by law at what age, what working status and how much money per year one can withdraw so as to not allow people to withdraw unsustainable amounts each year.

Hi Geoff,

Another fellow Aussie and I survive here on Pension/Superannuation combination, latter only relatively small.  I have it in an industry fund, low fees, great returns, average in excess over the past 9 years.  I only withdraw the minimum 5% or a little more each year trying to get it to last and maintain my meagre balance.  I survive quite ok here, but would hate to try it back in Oz.

The introduction of the superannuation scheme (rather late into my working life unfortunately) was one of the few pluses ever to come out of a Labor Government in Australia.  However, they made the fatal mistake of putting it in the hands of the hands of the greedy private sector.  Industry funds virtually always outperform these private companies and charge low fess.  In my case less than $100 a year.  I have a friend who is with a private fund and is charged several thousand and he  has a similar balance to mine - its a no brainer, but still he would not move his super and now he has retired with a much smaller balance than mine?

I recall when this idea was floated by Keating how he suggested that he had searched the world's super fund systems and this one was the best  Well that was bollocks as he only had to go Singapore to find what is really the best system in the world, run by the Government and built their infrastructure which is regarded as one of the most liveable cities in the world today.

However, may have digressed a little but I think this is a great discussion point and very valid.  I hope I have fallen off the perch before the pension runs out!!!.  

[GeoffH]

1 hour ago, mogo51 said:

Hi Geoff,

Another fellow Aussie and I survive here on Pension/Superannuation combination, latter only relatively small.  I have it in an industry fund, low fees, great returns

 

I have to agree with the 'industry fund' comment, they easily outperform the for profit funds.

Although my particular industry fund was swallowed up by Australian Super (which is a not for profit fund that's absorbed a number of smaller industry funds).

 

[Jack Peterson]

12 minutes ago, GeoffH said:

Although my particular industry fund was swallowed up by Australian Super (which is a not for profit fund that's absorbed a number of smaller industry funds).

A Similar thing happened way back in the 80's in the UK. they stopped it as it was not beneficial to many  Pensioners or those waiting for the age related pension, However (and surprisingly enough) we (or at least me) are getting this Payment we made back in our pensions now as a sought of Top up. Meagre at about 12 pound sterling per 4 weekly but at least we are getting it back, anything we paid in at a cut off date is already added in the main bulk and the Balance paid in after that date and it was about 2 years in my case is being returned although it does not show as a separate item, it will show in your (UK) yearly printout ( if you don't get one you should enquire)

 To me, the Superannuation scheme was never going to work but then, we had no choice as it was taken at wage source, I understand that at one time you could opt out BUT as I now understand, those that did have lost all to the private venture that was set up to administer it ie; cost to administer to low income payment in. That is why I think it was stopped It seemed only beneficial to the Big earners that already had a pension pot building 

 This is how I understand it.

Jack

Morning All

[Mike In Canada]

Im retiring next year and will be 54. Being self employed my entire life I don't have a pension. My business is successful and I have made some investments in real estate that will pay me more than 30K per month in rent plus a large sum of savings and the option to sell my properties or give them to my children, I will retire very comfortably in the Philippines.