You're losing your super because you were meant toit's a Macquarie scam While working and retired Australians alike are chewing their fingernails to the bone as they watch their superannuation accounts melt down, the Commonwealth government is planning to raise compulsory super from 9 per cent to 12 per cent in order to force even more workers' money into the market black holebecause bailing out the financial speculators is what super was invented for! The truth about superannuation is inadvertently revealed in the book, Unfinished Business: Paul Keating's interrupted revolution, by shameless Keating groupie David Love. The bottom line is that super is a scam pulled on working Australians by Keating and Bill Kelty, to shovel money into the coffers of Macquarie Bank and similar financial parasites. Every true Labor person who still supports the ALP should hide in shame, because they know it is a corrupted party that has betrayed its Labor principles and roots, and now actually despises working people, since 1983 passing policies that set up workers to be either milked by financiers, or culled by greenies, or both. Everything Keating did to the Australian economy from 1983 was in fact the implementation of the schemes cooked up in the Campbell Report by John Howard and John Hewson during the Fraser government. But it was all directed from the City of London via the City's powerhouse Hill Samuel bank, whose Australian subsidiary later became known as Macquarie Bank. Keating pushed compulsory super, Love wrote, because "unless the growth in savingsand therefore in financial capitalcontinued to accelerate, Macquarie and institutions like it could not manage to sustain the momentum of the growth in their overseas operations, and Keating wanted these as a new Australian industry." In other words, the person who annihilated Australia's manufacturing industries and whole chunks of our agricultural industries through free trade and "competition policy"another scam cooked up and implemented by Macquarie Bankdidn't design super to fund retirements, but to create a new "industry" [sic(k!)] that could displace those productive industries, based on the parasitical financial looting epitomised by the "millionaire's factory"Macquarie Bank. Hill Samuel/Macquarie Bank has been the principal architect and beneficiary of the financial reforms that have dismantled Australia's industrial economy: It was a major influence on the Campbell Committee in the late 1970s, and then Campbell Committee creator John Hewson worked for Hill Samuel as a consultant at the same time as he was the economics advisor to then-Treasurer John Howard on implementing Campbell's directives to float the dollar and open Australia to foreign banks. When Hawke and Keating camouflaged the Campbell Report as the Martin Report (to hide its Liberal Party origins from Labor supporters) and followed its orders, Macquarie Bank won the second foreign bank licence, Hewson took charge as Executive Director, and Macquarie ran the dollar float. As stated, Macquarie was enormously boosted by the launch of compulsory super. Macquarie executive Fred Hilmer wrote the Hilmer Report on National Competition Policy, and fellow Macquarie executive Graeme Samuel oversaw its enforcement through the National Competition Council and then the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), which policy forced each level of government to adopt "competitive" practices that were nothing but a blatant excuse to mass-privatise public assets and leave important public responsibilities such as infrastructure to private profiteers, for example, private toll roads, a sector dominated around the world by Macquarie Bank. Macquarie Bank funded Victoria's Tasman Institute, which wrote Jeff Kennett's $30 billion electricity privatisation plans, from which Macquarie made hundreds of millions of dollars in fees and also joined some consortia buying the assets; later Kennett Treasurer Alan Stockdale quit state parliament to work for Macquarie. Under former NSW Premier Bob Carr Macquarie was given such generous concessions on its private toll roads that one exec indiscreetly boasted they were a license to print moneyCarr also went to work for Macquarie. Macquarie keeps an enormous number of former politicians on its payroll. When the 2008 GFC struck, Macquarie would have collapsed were it not able to use its influence to organise the Rudd government to bail it and the other banks out through loan guarantees. (Click here for a PDF file from the CEC's 2004 New Citizen Defeat the SynarchyFight for a National Bank, featuring the Macquarie Bank expos entitled, "Ripping off the Common Good: The Macquarie Bank".) David Love writes that Keating and Macquarie Bank intended that their financial reforms would establish Australia as the "Antipodean Venice"a modern Australian version of the evil Venetian monetary empire which produced almost nothing, but invented modern central banking and casinos, and also ran the world's drug, slave, and bullion trade for centuries, before leading Venetians moved the seat of their empire to its present position in the City of London. (See the latest New Citizen for the history of the Venetian and British monetary empires.) This Venetian fantasy has hit a major snag, though, because the 9 per cent compulsory contribution is not enough. Workers are being told that experts have discovered it is not enough for adequate retirements, but 9 per cent was never going to be enough under Keating's Venetian planhe'd always reckoned on 15 per cent. The stalling at 9 per cent is what Love calls Keating's "interrupted revolution". Furthermore, the global financial crisis, which has exposed the financial predator banks like Macquarie as bankrupt, has hit home that a lot more that 9 per cent of workers' wages will need to be siphoned off to keep the parasites alive. That is why it is now, just when your super is melting down in front of your eyes, another worker-betraying union snake, Bill Shorten, is trying to convince you that the Gillard government's rise in compulsory super contributions to 12 per cent on the way to 15 per cent, is for your retirement. CEC leader Craig Isherwood said today, "Australians must realise they have been had. Then they must ditch the gambling mentality that comes with being forced to survive in the financial markets, and join with the CEC to fight for a return to the common good principles best exemplified by the 'old Labor' Party of O'Malley, Anstey, Curtin and Chifley. "You don't meet people's retirement needs by throwing them to the speculative wolves, but by expanding the real physical economy, via a national bank-financed program of great infrastructure projects, manufacturing and agriculture, which would allow for properly-funded health and aged care, a decent aged pension, and an adequate welfare safety net. "Only the CEC has the guts to expose this scam, because only the CEC is committed to an economic system not dictated by Macquarie-style British Empire bankers. To support that fight, join the CEC."
Superannuation is a scam. Every single working person should have total control where their remaining time (money) goes after legalized theft (tax).
Another Labour fail. Australian history is full of them. The Unions own them and the unions are corrupt to the core.
Every single working person DOES have the chance to have total control of their money by setting up a Self Managed Super Fund. The problem isn't with super, it's with people being too lazy to manage their own money.
You are looking at an ideal, not a reality. The Super system is a failure that is about to lose the life savings of millions of people. This is because the Super system is flawed and corrupt. Yes, you can say that "The problem isn't with super, it's with people being too lazy to manage their own money", but of course the Super system is designed and set up to feed corporate profits, and is designed to at all costs avoid people managing their super themselves. They do this by making it difficult and expensive to self manage, only allowing a set of "approved" options that is designed to confuse and steer people away from having control or even realising that they have control over their own money. The system is designed to keep people like grazing animals and gently steer them away from "silly, unnecessary" whims like taking control of their own fate. Super as a concept is a good idea, but so is democracy and thalidomide and banking industry self-regulation. The Australian Super fund system is a corporate feeding trough and very effective way to part people from their savings.
Government: "here is a box, you can do WHATEVER YOU WANT WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THIS BOX" Me: "Sorry, total control implies I save or spend this as I wish, when I wish, without you setting the rules, how much to take out of my pay, without fee-whores to manage it for me, etc. It's my money, parasite!"
And you know when you see Super ads on every f@#%ing street corner that someone is getting screwed, big-time.
Yes, investing successfully is hard. Yes, keeping accurate records is a pain. Yes, taking responsibility for your own shit when you can pay someone else to look after it and blame them if it all goes pear-shaped is a big call to make. No, it's not a big scam, it's just people doing what people do and whining about how hard life is (Yes, life is hard. Get used to it princess). Seriously, if you set up a SMSF and put a third of the funds into precious metals, a third into cash and a third into an ASX200 Accumulation Index fund you'd be beating most "professional" fund managers out there in performance (some by double digits). So what's stopping you?
Nothing. BUT what I am saying is that the system is set up in such a way as to stop the majority doing that. An honest super system would inform and encourage members to do exactly why you describe. The current system is the opposite - it uses every means to steer members away from that course and keep them uninformed about the possibility. Have you EVER seen a advert for super that says "manage your own super?" Every advert basically says "Put your money in our fund and forget about it, we know what's best and will look after it so that you will have loads of money when you are old".
The system knows that the majority of the people wouldn't give a damn about SMSF until their supers are gone! You can't blame it to the people by saying they are lazy and ignorance for not managing their own super. Let's find out who's behind super? Follow the money. Who benefits with all the money taken from working Australians? What the hell?? Super basically means... 'Look people, you are stupid and can't manage your money. If you have the money you will spend it on stupid addictions like booze and gambling anyway. So we came up with a lovely system designed & sponsored by big Corporations/banks for you and believe us you'll have savings when you retired' And you don't see that is a scam?
We Started our own SMSF in 1994 with just $6000 using a Trevisan unit trust. The wife then rolled her industry super into our SMSF in 1995. Talk about a bun fight we had to get it out of the industry fund. It got even harder when we set up a bank account for the unit trust and the lady behind the counter at CBA realised we were going to contol our own destiny she lectured the wife on how she should'nt listen to me but rather let the bank manage her super 16 years later our SMSF is in the top 8% of all SMSF's thanks to not listening to accountants and investment advisors who all said putting our funds into commercial property meant that we were not diversified. When the share market tanked all those diversified paper equities showed their true values, Being in control of our own destiny meant our properties were all paid out by 2009 and produce a steady rental income. Kind Regards non recourse
Um, so you're saying that advertisements try to convince you to do business with the company paying for the advert? And they don't even clearly explain how there are other options out there that may be a better choice for you, given your personal needs and circumstances? Wow, when did that start happening?
No, it isn't a scam and most people would spend all their money on largely pointless rubbish given the opportunity. "The system" doesn't care whether you look after your own retirement savings through a SMSF or whether you decide to let a big corporate fund manager look after it for you. All "the system" cares about is that you put aside a small percentage of your earnings and invest it so you'll have money to live on when you retire. And yes, you can blame people for not taking an active interest in where and how those funds are invested. It's your retirement and you have the most to lose if the money isn't invested well.
When your super is unfunded, you can't change funds and your only choice is to be a member your employers superfund... sounds like a scam to me This hasn't happened to me yet but the poor fool that tries will regret the day they did
Anybody who has read unfinished business would know that keating wanted to tale super to fifteen percent, he wanted this so that he could create a positive feedback loop of domestic invesment funds. Keating isn't an idiot, he knew jack Lang, he would have read the great bust and he would be aware of how the CBA used to operate. If anything he was trying to get us back to that point, where we could largely finance ourselves. Super isn't a scam, you can sit 100% in cash if you're worried about the outlook. Of roll into an smsf and buy metals. Here's a question, if keating is such a bastard, and masterminded this great betrayal of the working class, why has the labour party largely taken him out the back and put him down like a lame cow? Our super system is one of the best in the world. Those aren't my words, they're Martin Armstrongs...
All you people who have been here for a while would have seen me write a couple of times that I think super is the greatest con ever perpetuated on the australian worker and I still believe that. I always felt that the reason Keating wanted super so much was to give the unions control of large amounts of cash via industry super funds. To answer some of the comments here. Everybody can manage their own super fund, thats true but the average person believes what he/she is told that their money is being looked after by the super fund. It is only when they near retirement and find they have a lousy 30k or so that they realise they have been conned. It is also true that if people have control of their own money many of them will waste it all and not have any left at retirement but hopefully they will have paid tax all their working life so surely some of that tax should have been put away for them by our economic managers. We took all our money out of super 20 odd yrs ago and went into business for ourselves and now are S/F retirees and we live a very good life style far better than we ever would have if we had stayed in a super fund managed by somebody who doesn't give a continental about my money because it is not going to bother them if my money is gone, they still take a % whether they make or lose money. Go to a bank or other lending institution and ask them for a loan to set up or buy a business and the first thing they want to know is were is your hurt money ie how much of your own money are you putting in and that is how super funds should be run, so if the financial adviser loses your money he should lose the same amount and I am sure he would then be more careful with your hard earned.
How do you know this? Is there a list published somewhere with every SMSF and what they are returning?
