Superannuation theft.

[Teckair]

This is for all those sheep out there who don't think these things can happen, starting today there will be information on one of channel seven's news programs about the possibility of the government using super dollars people have saved to fill the black hole that is our economy. Before the red army start blaming Abbott for this just remember who the achievers were who put us in this mess, band-aids like giving away billions to get us through the GFC.

 

 

[dazza 38]

Labor closed down unused bank accounts that had layed dormant for 3 plus years in 2012 and kept the money. 550 milion was taken from 156000 bank accounts in 2013/2013.

 

Apparently.

 

 

[Methusala]

Couldn't think of a better way to spend taxpayers' money. Save the economy from the fate suffered by most other OECD economies during the GFC. Now anyone want to donate $8billion to the reserve bank? Yes, you over there , what's your name? Joe? Thanks. How about giving all those profits back to the poor miners? Yes? What's the name? Tony? And who wants to donate the poor people's money to a $20 billion slush fund for Big Pharma? Your name Sir? Dexter Dutton was it? No? Peter. Well thanks to all you generous folk.

 

 

[Methusala]

Oh, did I forget to mention $800,000,000 in back taxes owed by the News Ltd group FORGIVEN? And how about novated car leases for all the people who want the taxpayer to pay for their BMW's? You have a lot to thank the Lieberals for.

 

 

[coljones]

Labor closed down unused bank accounts that had layed dormant for 3 plus years in 2012 and kept the money. 550 milion was taken from 156000 bank accounts in 2013/2013.Apparently.

Apparently not quite correct. The money that was moved was largely in accounts that didn't pay any interest (or a low rate) but may have charged fees. The money moved is not kept permanently but can be reclaimed. The interest rate paid appears to be the current inflation rate. There are no fees.

 

If the banks hang on to the money the bank benefits. If the government hangs onto the money the customers benefit as well as the government (us the owners of the government) who get cheaper loans.

 

In some ways, it seems, the government, unlike the banks, is doing us a favour.

 

 

[coljones]

This is for all those sheep out there who don't think these things can happen, starting today there will be information on one of channel seven's news programs about the possibility of the government using super dollars people have saved to fill the black hole that is our economy. Before the red army start blaming Abbott for this just remember who the achievers were who put us in this mess, band-aids like giving away billions to get us through the GFC.

It may well be that our new fighters and submarines will be leased out to the superfunds rather than to asian and middle eastern money men. The next step could be to outsource the defence of Australia to Bangalor - just like your paypacket.

 

 

[Teckair]

There was no sign of the program here last night, I was told the journalist is going to be Chris Reason and it would be on channel 7 not sure which program.

 

 

[winsor68]

Every one has to do their share of the heavy lifting...

 

 

[Chird65]

Apparently not quite correct. The money that was moved was largely in accounts that didn't pay any interest (or a low rate) but may have charged fees. The money moved is not kept permanently but can be reclaimed. The interest rate paid appears to be the current inflation rate. There are no fees.If the banks hang on to the money the bank benefits. If the government hangs onto the money the customers benefit as well as the government (us the owners of the government) who get cheaper loans.

 

In some ways, it seems, the government, unlike the banks, is doing us a favour.

Strange; when I worked in a bank and someone came in to claim an old account we would lookup the closed and dormant report, find the balances, manually calculate and pay the interest. The accounts were closed off to an internal account so computer storage was not used and maintained for mostly dormant small balance accounts. Back then the cost of maintaining the savings account was $5 a month. Fees depended on the account type chosen but once dormant and closed there were no ongoing fees.

 

As the contract was with the bank to keep the money I can't see why a government should have use of it. I bet the bank still needs to do all the work when someone turns up to claim the money. Banks are not kind fluffy places; but that does not mean that they don't do what is in a contract. Why should they do favours.

 

 

[Teckair]

Every one has to do their share of the heavy lifting...

Very funny coming from a ALP supporter.

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

I personally take offence to be called an anything supporter.....Both parties should have to work, and damn hard for our vote....to predetermine that you are always an A voter or always a B voter is to close your mind to the principle that someone from A or B might actually have a good idea that is deserving of support no matter what historical stance you might have taken....

 

Somehow Opposition parties have realised that oppose is part of their name and have taken it to heart....If only they realised that not everything from the otherside is crazy and in some cases deserves support rather than opposition then this crazy neither party can advance anything situation might become history and wouldn't that be great!

 

 

[Marty_d]

A lib doing some lifting

 

[ATTACH]47574._xfImport[/ATTACH]

 

[turboplanner]

He's just reading a chart which recorded the financial record of the Labor Party, and it looks as if he is close to end end of the chart.

 

 

[Downunder]

No matter which party is "in", the opposition simply "opposes"....... such a shame....

 

 

[Marty_d]

He's just reading a chart which recorded the financial record of the Labor Party, and it looks as if he is close to end end of the chart.

I think what he's doing is called "Policy Development".

 

 

[spacesailor]

And it's still making news.

 

"In the wash-up from last week’s Productivity Commission report,

 

it’s worth considering the question. Could superannuation be the biggest con job ever perpetrated"

 

I omitted the last bit of the sentence: against the generation X & Y:

 

spacesailor

 

 

[old man emu]

In my opinion, the introduction of compulsory employer super contributions, and the pressure to have employees make contributions to their own super has been a double-edged sword for the whole economy.

 

The good side is that people who never developed the habit of saving have been forced to do some saving.

 

The bad side is a bit broader.

 

Compulsory employer contributions are an added financial cost to running a business which previously only had to make plans to pay out long service leave entitlements.

 

Contributions from both employer and employee have to go somewhere - mainly existing Life Assurance companies.

 

The Life Assurance companies had to do something with the money to overcome losses caused by Inflation which reduced the worth of the currency over time. So the companies invested in shares, amongst other things, and use the dividend on shares to balance the value losses due to inflation.

 

The problem with the goal of investing in shares with a view to obtain a dividend is that the investor demands a positive return on the investment. This means that every stage of the use of the invested money must return a profit. Therefore, to produce a profit, costs rise at the end of the chain, and those costs are borne by the consumer.

 

So as more and more is placed in superannuation funds, the more and more is invested to obtain a dividend, and the more and more a consumer must pay to produce that dividend.

 

 

[Yenn]

The super funds are living high, with all the money that is forced into super. The funds have to produce a profit to pay out in the end, but the incoming money is so much that they can afford to pay themselves magnificent salaries and not have to worry too much about looking after the people who will need retirement funds.

 

 

[coljones]

The super funds are living high, with all the money that is forced into super. The funds have to produce a profit to pay out in the end, but the incoming money is so much that they can afford to pay themselves magnificent salaries and not have to worry too much about looking after the people who will need retirement funds.

Some super companies are living high on the hog, these companies have high fees and lower returns to the contributors. The Industry, not-for-profit and company funds operate from a much lower fee base and the returns to the contributors is, generally, much higher. The problem for the Productivity Commission and the Liberal Party is that the really efficient funds are those associated with unions. A further problem for the Liberals is that if the inefficient for-profit funds are forced away from the trough then kickbacks and contributions to the Liberal and National Parties will fall. This is, probably, the reason that the Productivity Commission failed to nominate the innefficient funds. As the Banking Royal Commission proceeds it would appear that the biggest contributors to the LNP will start to be revealed as the Mafia it is (but without the machine guns)

 

 

[old man emu]

As the Banking Royal Commission proceeds it would appear that the biggest contributors to the LNP will start to be revealed as the Mafia it is (but without the machine guns)

They do have machine guns. They are called ATMs

 

 

[red750]

I worked in the superannuation industry for 8 years until my retirement. Not for a super fund per se, but for a administration company which contracted to process employer contributions and member claims as well as customer service call centre for a dozen or more industry super funds. By using economies of scale, these funds were able to process the funds much more cheaply than each owning their own systems. They each had their investment strategies and policies, but the nuts and bolts of daily processing is the same for all, to the point where my son now works for an industry fund who have their own call centre, but use the same processing centre. When I worked there, prior to 2010, funds were returning an average of 10 to 14% annual return. These funds pay their agents a set salary, not trailing commissions.

 

 

[spacesailor]

The People who don't like it can leave & leave their contributions behind. I know four families that have emigrated overseas,(Canada)

 

No one left to claim anything.

 

The dead don't get anything out of their contributions either.

 

"The good side is that people who never developed the habit of saving have been forced to do some saving.

 

A life time of super for ten years pension.

 

spacesailor

 

 

[coljones]

The People who don't like it can leave & leave their contributions behind. I know four families that have emigrated overseas,(Canada)No one left to claim anything.

 

The dead don't get anything out of their contributions either.

 

"The good side is that people who never developed the habit of saving have been forced to do some saving.

 

A life time of super for ten years pension.

 

spacesailor

When a condition of release, age or death, is reached then the funds can be drawn down irrespective of where you live. Dormant accounts may be transferred to the government but still accrue income without some of the extortionate fees charged by some funds. The contributer, dependants or the estate are entitled to make a claim on the fund following meeting a condition of release even if the funds are held by the government. If your Canadian friends have met a condition of release they can recover their funds.

 

 

[Yenn]

Those of us who did choose to save for our future have not been well rewarded.

 

I worked during the sixties and also seventies. I saved and bought a house. In those days mortgage rates were up to 16% and inflation was running at 10% p.a.

 

I managed to buy my home and tuck a bit away for the future. Listening to the government I bought Telstra and Commonwealth bank shares. I cannot complain about how they have done in the past, but the future is not looking too rosy. If I sold them now they would bring in a lot less than a few years ago, but that would be due to government mismanagement of banking and communications.

 

Now the money I have in super is not earning anything like it used to and the financial advisers are taking their cut all the time. My financial adviser sent me some papers to sign a few months ago, basicly to appoint him as my adviser. My wife wonders why I have just ignored them. He was the bloke who told me that when the construction of the Curtis Island gas plants finished, it would not affect Gladstones economy. Now Gladstone has the cheapest rent of any city or town of more than about 10,000 people and house prices are about 60% of two years ago. Some financial genius that one.

 

 

[spacesailor]

My bro-inlaw had his Bank send that same letter, to put a crook in charge of His money, said crook did a runner, the bank said "not their problem.

 

His lawyer said the Bank put him there, so they had to reimburse his couple of hundred-thousand $.

 

Then he changed banks.

 

spacesailor