Beliefs are nothing more than unjustified opinion. Do you make investment decisions based upon the Second Coming of Jesus? Your belief that broke governments will raid super is unjustified. You're not the only who has the mistaken belief that governments will raid super because they'll go broke. This fallacy can negatively impact your investment decisions, for example you may decide not to take advantage of the tax concessions available to investors that investing through your superfund may give you because you think it doesn't matter anyway because at some point in time the government will need to raid your superannuation anyway so what's the point? Far better to hide your money under a mattress or just buy and hoard precious metal and watch it devalue or attract capital gains at your marginal tax rate if it does appreciate. Sovereign governments cannot go broke. Individuals that don't understand that need to learn why governments which issue their own monopoly currency can't default (unless they want to) and reassess their investment rationale. I don't care what you think - actually I do because you're prone to spreading misinformation based upon ignorance - I'm sharing my opinion for the sake of others that may also hold the same belief as you but are more open-minded to learning than you are.
Sorry Shiney, I still have no interest in your personal opinions or point of view so kindly stop directing your comments towards me. You seem not to understand the members here are more than capable of making an informed decision on what to do or not do with their own money. If they are unsure one (just one) way to make better choices is to ask other members here for thoughts, idea's, experiences etc. before going away to research it further. Its called freedom of choice. I wont respond too anymore of your reply's (try as you might to bait, insult or attack me) as I'm not going to derail this important thread for your entertainment. I did report to the mods after your first response, noting that this was exactly the way you were going to behave. Actually i hoped you would be prove wrong, sadly not.
Hang on a sec. You want members to be able to make their own informed decisions yet when I point out to you and them that your belief that governments (a) can't go broke and (b) therefore will raid superfunds is a load of nonsense you want me to to stop posting and replying to you? Kind of illogical don't you think? From what I've seen over the past 10 years on this forum there is a mountain of misinformation spread and just downright nonsense perpetuated by some who hold an archaic view of our current monetary system more akin to when nations were on a gold standard. And some of that misinformation is directed as hostility to others. Well those views don't apply anymore yet some have failed to move with the times. Lol, on what grounds? Nice waste of the moderator's time.
Rational reasons to withdraw super include: - you think you can manage your funds better than the fund manager - you want to control your own financial destiny - there is an opportunity cost in leaving the funds in your super scheme - you are in personal financial difficulty and require the funds - you want to diversify and your current super provider doesn't allow that - even a philosophical opposition to the forced confiscation of your earnings - concern over future government changes to legislation regarding access to and tax treatment of superfunds. There's also irrational reasons such as the one I stated above regarding the mistaken belief broke governments will thieve your nest egg, and there's rational reasons too to leave your $$$ in your fund eg tax advantages. Any one want to add any others?
@mmm....shiney! I think people are more concerned about govt potential tinkering to super rules that negatively impact ones funds or accessibility of said funds prior to being able to access them as opposed to an outright grab of the lot.
What if that "sovereign govt" borrowed gold or another country's currency and then their own fiat money became worthless? I'm pretty sure they would then be broke?
So just reading this first page here and it seems to me anyone claiming this might find their benefits cut and funding their own unemployment. Is it possible they require information from the govt that you can/are on a benefit so they can cut your benefit as you now have funds from your super? In NZ here it is my understanding if you have proven money in your accounts then you can not access a benefit until you have used it all and are poor again. Am i way off here?
Sterling-nz, below is what the govt have stated at the moment, not to say your not correct if they change the rules or interpretation at a later stage. About the measure The government is allowing individuals affected by COVID-19 to access up to $10,000 of their superannuation in 2019–20 and a further $10,000 in 2020–21. Individuals will not need to pay tax on amounts released – coronavirus amounts are not taken into account under any income or means tests.
How would they go broke if they borrowed gold? I need a few more details to try and answer that. Good question. Probably belongs in the MMT thread. Do government's borrow foreign currency? They can issue debt in foreign currencies but I'm not sure they borrow foreign currency. They don't need to, although I suppose it's the same as borrowing foreign currency. They issue bonds denominated in foreign currencies then promise to pay those bonds back with interest over a period of time. From my understanding a currency will become worthless only when other nations refuse to trade with it. If that country has issued foreign debt but it can't pay the interest on the bonds denominated in foreign debt then I guess it can just revalue it's own currency and reissue bonds with even juicier interest rates, or borrow from the IMF. It's probably not an issue for most sovereign Western developed nations and more an issue for tinpot regimes.
Goldeneye, my simplistic view is, Our Govt has continued too run when in the red & when in the black they haven't shut down. They do however look to find ways in which to "look Better" & fill in financial shortcomings in the quickest easiest possible ways. In my option having a huge "pot of gold" in the form of held super is very tempting in such times. When i started my working life super was totally optional, after a few years they changed the rules & what was once optional was then mandatory. The rules have changed many times & I'm sure will continue to do so. They may very well at some stage for instance say, we will take it off the greedy corrupt unsafe super funds and run it for you giving you a wonderful looking pension (only to erode it later), no one knows. How this effects each person differs but to me its like playing a game of cards where the dealer can change the rules at any point but you only find out once your all in. A friend (in the know) once told me the govt planned too increase the age of retirement in increments to the age of 75. I laughed & said they will never get away with increasing the retirement age & said he was a nutty conspiracy kook. Fast forward to today, maybe not so nutty. This was only one of several planned changes he spoke about & said it was coming from both sides of politics. Anything is possible we all just need to weigh up our risk V's reward with what is actually happening now & try to make the best choices possible for ourselves.
For the benefit of other members that is a fallacy and one that @dross continues to peddle despite there being absolutely no factual basis to it. The other points he raises about changing the playing field are valid and real and are in the list I've creted above.
dross, OK I'll tell you my story. I am retired now living off my Super. When I was younger I didn't think much of it. Just a little something to get at retirement. Things were different back then, it was not the norm to get Super but when it started by law back at around 1993 I welcomed anything that might help me through life later. One day I had some spare time and I went into Sydney CBD and walked into one of the big Super Offices name deleted and had a chat with an investment Adviser. This guy showed me how a little money each week would amount a nice big pay out at age 55. Yes, at that time legally you could retire and claim all your Super at age 55. So I joined my works fund and started to pump money in every Month. A little more than the Super Guarantee. Then out of the blue by the stroke of the Pen the F*****G government of the time raised the Super access age to 60. Thank you very much for adding 5 more of work to my life!. Not only that, Super rules changed over and over, year after year and it has not stopped even until now. I did not get serious with my Super until 5 years prior to my retirement. i read and studied everything I could about it to be on top of it. To cut an already long story short I do not trust Super Funds or the Government to do the right things by us citizens. They can and do change things all the time and it pisses me off very much. How can you plan anything when the rules are constantly changing. If I was anything under the age of 50 now, I would be putting in minimal amounts of money into my Super. After 55 and heading towards 60 I would then be concentrating on beefing it up. In any case you can still come undone by changes in law. In my opinion only, I would say go with your gut, do what you like. Only you can look after your money better than anyone else, that is my philosophy. Trust no one, good luck mate.
Maybe during war time a country wants to buy weapons, and the weapon selling country is only accepting gold as payment. So the country wanting weapons borrows gold to make payment, the in debt country loses the war they've also diluted their own currency to zero. The sovereign govt has nothing except a barren wasteland that's been bombed to oblivion, and their citizen slaves.
Well that's a scenario I hadn't considered. I guess that if a country loses a war and all of its citizens are enslaved then it probably isn't a sovereign nation, doesn't have a monopoly on the issuance of fiat currency and will probably be considered broke.
so they plan to creep the retirement age to 75? the current male life expectancy in Australia is 74.1. who needs super when you never retire!!!!! even if you know i guess you only on average need 10 years of super. guess what, when you die the govt takes 'their' slice of the pie.
Here's but one article from the fin review, Temptation, fallacy, possibility, timing issue? any of the above view it however you see fit. https://www.afr.com/opinion/will-the-morrison-government-nationalise-the-27trn-super-industry-20190115-h1a2oe
Ask the Labor Party what happens when you propose to national financial institutions. Didn't go so well for Ben Chifley.
Thank you for sharing this, SMSF rules have been tinkered with so much its beyond a joke, the latest 1.6 mil cap in SMSF that guess what does not apply to politicians. It was not that long ago you were given great incentive to the tune of 1 mil in a single financial year tax except on entry. Timmy
