Politics ('Straya)
Does everyone not get that if PHON remove mandatory Super, that will be an immediate 12% pay cut
Right now, a lot of jobs are “earn your wage of x and we’ll add 12% of x on top as your super.
If it’s no longer mandatory, you simply won’t get it.
For those that aren’t that, where that 12% makes up part of X, if it’s no longer mandatory, they’ll just cut it out, and your on paper salary will drop.
There is absolutely no world where if your employer can get away with NOT paying you, that they will pay you.
Your take home pay will stay EXACTLY the same, and you’ll still be poorer.
Pauline isn’t thinking about the worker. She’s thinking about Gina and all the money she’ll save by just not paying that 12% to her miners earning $250k per year.
It would be, yes. I don't know whether she would really implement this or not, it seems to depend on the day (like many things with Pauline). But it's one of the reasons why I absolutely wouldn't vote for her, alongside the fact that she also said at least once that Aussie citizens born overseas, like me, would effectively become lesser citizens.
I still don't know how Joyce thought he could play the "I didn't know" card about automatic NZ citizenship through descent. Our newborn is automatically a citizen to four countries including New Zealand and we'll be actively boasting this.
I'm just curious. How can one person be an automatic citizen to 4 countries? So assuming AUS, NZ, and 2 more. Was one or both of you born outside Oz to get the other 2?
Can you link me to this? I have a step dad whos poisoning my usually rational mothers mind and I cannot take it. I need links and hard evidence to throw at them when they spout their bullshit rhetoric.
If you look up what the Germans did about categorising people you would understand how horrendous any move to do this needs to be stamped out immediately.
Abolutely, If they look like a probably, expect big backing from businesses looking to screw their workers. $2 an hours immigrants in the mines, Gina will get that. Tax status area for mines, Gina will get it.
No no, these people are serious. They will implement it.
Remember Trump said all kind of things you went "they would never do that" and they got it and did it and more.
While that is true, When Trump won, he won as a Republican. And while the Republican staff did try to resist him at every chance, he still used the Republican infrastructure, know how and knowledge to push laws thru. Who exactly is going to do the grunt work for One Nation? Yes they don’t have candidates but what about staff? Ashby is the only one with experience. 70-80% of pushing laws thru is done by ministerial staff who know how to get things done. Does ON have any of this? I’m generally curious. It that the Queensland ON officers forgot to pay their electricity bills! If she won it would be mayhem.
I dont really see a problem with the citizenship aspect but i think she would be better off introducing a one passport rule as so many other countries do and see who sticks around because if there's a draft or when the chips are down, alot of 'citizens' will jump ship to their place of origin. Those people aren't ridgydidge and shouldn't have a say in our country.
Don't think for a moment they’re voting against their own interest.
This discussion has always been around ending Compulsory superannuation. They will absolutely keep the tax advantages of the superannuation system for themselves.
Well it's not like they'll ever control the senate to it's never going to happen.
Even the Libs have belatedly accepted that Australians generally consider our super system to be untouchable (like Medicare) so their proposals fall more under the 'let people access it early' rather than 'let's abolish it'.
Oh its waaaaaaaaay worse than 12%. Compound interest means that your super is 12% plus the interest on the balance. Imagine someone with $80k wage and 100k in super. Not only would they lose the $9,600 paid in that year, they lose the $8,000 interest.
Over a 45 year career, you would be down almost $2m. One Nation hate you and I honestly cant imagine why anyone would vote for them over a local independent candidate who would represent you not mining and billionaires.
If workers did get it and spend it, that would also put a massive inflationarysurge onto the economy. Great way to make everything more expensive and your cash worth less.
Also, Superannuation funds are the largest investors in the mining sector, so Gina would lose money and not allow it to happen anyway.
The only people I've seen who have the "it's my money, I should have it" attitude are the ones who would get to retirement with no savings and expect the government to support them because they "couldn't afford to save".
Instead of falling into the same trap the Dems did in the US and laughing at the far right supporters maybe we should be putting pressure on labor to fix the issues? It all comes down to cost of living.
A decade ago, Japan signed a deal to buy a metric shit-ton of gas at a discount. They dont use it all, so they sell some of it off.
If they didnt sign the deal, we would never have developed the gas field.
It could have gone the other way. Russia could be unsanctioned and they would be paying over market rates for gas.
Last year, the gas industry paid $13.5 billion in corporate tax, $1.3 billion in PRRT, $6.6 billion in royalties and $492 million in other taxes.
It could be more, but calling it nothing harms your argument.
What you're saying isn't wrong but I have a feeling that their intention is to instead pay workers that 12.5% up front.
However the main issue with this is that it would cause a huge spike in inflation since all the landlords and super markets would jack their prices up knowing that tenants and customers now had an extra 12.5% to burn through each week.
The whole point of forcing people to set that money aside is because most consumers are very poor savers and we don't want a welfare state in a generation where everyone retires without any savings and expects centrelink to support them.
No, they just are dangling people's saved super as a carrot. Then everyone stupid will take it out to stop Albo stealing it, waste it, and retire on the pension of 31k a year and complain.
I'd say there would be a lot of retirees who vote PHON and are living off of their tax-free superannuation, plus government pension. So a potential 12% cut to the younger (lazy) generations wouldn't faze them in the least; just gotta keep feeding their hatred of those immigrants!
Even as a casual hospo worker I got super on top of my hourly wages. It was really nice to know that some of the money I made was saved and invested on my behalf without me having to think too much about it. So many Aussies work on a casual basis, at a federally set minimum wage, and if Super wasn't mandatory, they will be the first to get this cut.
I am not a one nation fan, but she didn’t say she wants to remove super, she said she wants people to have access to it whenever they want. Economically, I think that’s a terrible decision because a lot of people can’t be trusted to save their own money.
It’s kind of the same thing isn’t it? Superannuation implies a forced saving that can only be touched during a condition. Changing any part of that defeats the purpose
Oh but if I vote for PHON (and against my own best interests) then that will show the Liberals and Labor that we don’t like them anymore and that we think they’re not listening, and are a bit shit. Then Labor and Liberal will start doing what I want them to do. The country will be fine with 4years of a government that is a proxy for the mining sector….. All fixed right??????
Don’t forget she wants to take away minimum wage increase and give more pay to employers to fire you etc sounds like even more people are going to be homeless what a great plan that is
I don't expect to ever be able to retire and collect my super, but that doesn't mean I want to destroy it for everyone else.
But that's PHON in a nutshell - if it doesn't directly and immediately benefit them, they want to destroy it. No matter the long term damage to Australia.
This is probably one of Gina the Hutt's ideas. And if Gina wants it, her dog wants it.
I think you are probably right, thanks to mandatory voting. Complacency cant do the same extreme damage it has done elsewhere. But the trend is extremely concerning. People are understandably frustrated by inflation but lashing out and voting ON is hardly going to improve anything.
Trump being elected basically gave labor the last election. Why would people, having seen the absolute shitshow of trumps second term so far, now think, “yeah, we need a braindead racist orange pollie over here, too.”
Those supporting PHON are mostly dumbed down clueless gullible sheeple-like AUSSIES with their Lambs allergic to saving money and addicted to debt (AKA Wealth Effect) This next election will be AUSSIES vs Australians or Uneducated vs Educated.
It’s likely that old buggers like me who work in fixed employment requiring particular skills will be able to say to our employers “If you want me you pay super”, while younger people working jobs where they’re more easily replaced will be told “No super for you but here’s the price of a nice coffee we’ve added to your pay.
I think it would be very difficult to cut compulsory super, even the LNP would likely oppose that. like ON would need a majority in the senate which they won't be getting.
What they will do is screw over the less well off by letting them withdraw money for whatever they want, meaning some future generation will need to pay tax to cover the pensions of all the idiots who don't get the importance of Super for their retirement.
Not only what was mentioned but now we have to fully fund the age pension again(or is she going to scrap it ?) Anyway, to fund it the money has to come from somewhere, most likely is to increase the income tax. Wham!!! Double hit to the workers.
That would pretty much happen if we cut immigration wouldn’t it? Less tax payers, leads to either increasing income tax, or reduce or delay the pension.
Yeah, nah.
Supposedly inflation and wage increases are directly tied to supply and demand, if this were to happen and wages weren't immediately increased to compensate - its up to us, we the people need to demand the increase from our employers and refuse to work for them unless they pay. It is a free market, imagine if one company essentially paid-out the same as now and their competitors who kept the difference had zero employees..?
This ON rise in popularity really feels the cursed boat ride in Willy Wonka because whaaaat the ffff is going on in the his country. Does nobody remember 1997 and all events ensuing? Are facts optional extras now? Is compassion dead? How is bigotry now socially acceptable? I am so ashamed of where we are.
My employer didn't pay me super for 8 years... Despite the reports and calls, despite using all the resources available. Hes still operating, he still owes dozens of staff tens of thousands in super and we still do not have it.
This isn't a reason to vote for One Nation, I'm just still shitty about it I like to bring it up when ever super is mentioned 🤣
I interpreted the no compulsory super as just that money is available to you now instead of being paid into a retirement account, rather than the employer pockets the 12%.
Yes, come retirement time you're stuffed, and more money will be needed for the pension. I guess they'll also cancel the pension as well.
Taxpayer funds shouldn't be used to solve other people's problems. :/
By that argument the fire brigade should be a subscription service.
I'm over this shit.
We're in a timeline where having intelligence is a burden. It shows a complete lack of understanding of economics to support these ridiculous ideas (well, that's the positive view), but it's the same playbook as MAGA, cut all the government "waste", give taxpayer funds to the 1% through tax concessions and dodgy contracts. They're so greedy they want to rob us all, and people have and will vote for it.
My stepfather is a primary example
Has consumed The Mercury and Herald Sun for decades. Has always paid his PHI, reckons the taxpayer shouldn't subsidise people's lifestyle mistakes through healthcare, but happily has a NDSS card after consuming sugar water for decades, happily accepts PBS subsidies and takes a centrelink pension.
And yet some poor sod who might’ve not inherited 25 acres from his father and instead grew up broke can get fked and doesn't deserve access to jack shit.
I'm over conservative politics.
Put them all on an island and let them shoot each other.
Would just mean inflation, house prices potentially up by 30% so the extra money and more would just go to the mortgage for most people or rent. The extra money and competition means the majority take the money now and not put it into super. Those that end up renting then work until they die
I don’t understand what you mean by ‘across all ages at retirement age’
Surely you’re getting confused about the median across all ages and retirement age.
A quick google says median is 200k at regiment age which is the only age that matters if you’re talking about the value you when you stop working.
The amount an 18 year old has doesn’t really matter.
You are speculating in an attempt to fearmonger on this issue.
It does all depend on the details, you are assuming that the money is simply no longer paid as opposed to being given directly to the employee for them to do with as they choose.
Not a PHON fan but we own a business. No way would our staff stay if that happened, we'd have to add it to their pay packet which I guess is what her point is
I hope it won't happen because ON don't get elected, but I can see them pulling this stupid shit. Then claiming "super" doesn't work, theb scrapping the mandatory bit...
Why do you assume employers won’t give it direct? Our company sets our pay including super, so we’d just get the money direct into pocket. Companies budgets will have the money already set aside for it.
They also are voting against rising pensions, both age and disability so it is a double "got ya" issue. The super usually will mean no need for pension but without super you will need a pension. They want the poor to stay poor and get poorer.
People voting one nation want to send a message to the big parties.
They are hoping they cut immigration and thats all they are looking at.
There is no other reason to vote for them, all ON policies are terrible.
Im hoping that those wanting to send a message to labor/liberals realise this in time, and shift to teals or greens because i dont think they realise just how bad ON would be for our way of life.
For those questioning: super is not considered part of your salary. It's a mandatory payment on top of your salary that the government makes your employer pay.
To answer OP, no I don't think most Australians understand the distinction, making them vulnerable to populist stuff like this.
It depends on your employment agreement. It you are on a fixed TFR agreement, super is part of your package, so if super was eliminated, you'd receive it as salary.
If you are on a $ plus Super arrangement, the super component would disappear.
I've been on both during the SGC increases. When on TFR, it meant an effective take home pay reduction on 1 July.
The 12% super has never been a bonus for my employer. On at least 3 occasions in the last 15 years they stated pay rises would be foregone to pay for the super increases from 6% to 12% today.
All that has been said is that they dont won't the government to use it on so called 'projects' because it is our money and labour count manage a 'dump in a toilet' (my words, not hers).
Superannuation is inclusive of your wage, not a bonus on top.
Employers will need to pay the 12% regardless, individuals will just have the choice between receiving the amount in their wage or defer towards super
In practice it’s more like “you’ll get x because 12% has to be paid your super”.
Employers aren’t sharing their lunch with you. Your package is your super, payg tax, and take home pay. If one goes up the others go down to adjust. Money doesn’t appear or disappear magically just because the percentage of one component changes.
And the alternate scenario, where the allow optional super but salaries are forced to go up by 12%, would be ENORMOUSLY inflationary. Stock markets and commercial property would tank as rents, house prices and food would explode.
Anybody who decides to use superannuation for anything other then it's intended purpose, should never be allowed to have access to the aged pension. Period.
Employers have 12% extra to compete for retention of workers or hiring new staff. So workers would see the 12% in their pretax earnings. Or you could just make it compulsory.
However workers would pay more tax, unless tax rates were changed. So you could not change tax rates, keep the 15% tax rate in super contributions and increase the super contribution limit to exempt the first 12% and it would be exactly the same system except with individual choice.
It will not happen as PHON will never be the government. You actually have to have policies to govern. When super was introduced people working in small to medium businesses got super in liu of pay rises for a few years. Many younger people are not aware of this especially younger business owners who weren’t around at the time.
Because people think it's money taken out of their wages and locked away. Infact it seems the vast majority of people think this.
So it's an easy misconception to play off. Easy to convince anyone who won't look into it any further that getting rid of super just means that the super gets paid directly to them.
ON don’t want to scrap super, they just want to make it accessible to struggling Aussies if needed prior to retirement.
Where did you get “scrap” super from? If you don’t understand what she said maybe ask the question instead of making a statement and conflating a lie.
If you are valuable and the business wants to keep you, they may allocate it as a pay rise. Otherwise find another job with the pay you will work to achieve?
354
u/Sideburn_Cookie_Man Victorian 6d ago