Contribute to my super or put money elsewhere

Discussion in 'Superannuation' started by GRETZKY427, Aug 18, 2016.

  1. SteveS

    SteveS New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2016
    Messages:
    940
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Brisbane
    +1

    Human nature dictates that the Australian Government WILL raid our super in some way. The current government has foreshadowed this by its recent actions. Now that the taboo of 'sacred super' has been busted, I can guarantee that the huge pile of money sitting in super will be too much of a temptation for future governments who need to make election promises when there is no money to be found elsewhere. Once started, who knows where that will lead. Yay, free money!

    Just like Pooh bear when he sees Rabbit's honey jar and says, "I'll just have a small portion......"
     
  2. Ouch

    Ouch Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2010
    Messages:
    1,066
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    Can't the Government just print more money if it needs more money? And if they raid our super and leave us with nothing that'll just mean they would need to pay us a pension?
     
  3. SteveS

    SteveS New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2016
    Messages:
    940
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Chances are, your private super would, if left untouched, pay you more than the basic government pension. They will take more than they give.

    Besides, desperate and greedy politicians will happily spend your money now, and then leave future politicians to worry about giving it (some) back.
     
  4. Abossy

    Abossy Active Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    390
    Likes Received:
    39
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Perth, WA
    I don't know for certain, but I think Australia is unique in it's style of forced super - that is, you CANT access it until preservation age. I know for a fact in the US you can withdraw your 401K with a massive tax hit.

    So from the government's point of view, they basically have trillions of $$ under their legislative control which doesn't need to be accessed by the owners for at least the next decade or two - depending on the proportions of that wealth held by the older folk. So are you honestly going to try and convince me that in some sort of future debt crisis (which I believe is inevitable), they are not going to be tempted to tap some of that wealth?

    They wouldn't be stupid enough to take the whole lot - and they can't, most of it wouldn't be liquid - and that would cause it's own massive problems - I'm thinking something more like mandatory investment into some sort of government instrument or fund. I'm more convinced however that they will stop the lump sum payouts. I.e. you have to take it as an annual payout. There was serious talk about this by some muppet a few months ago.
     
  5. SilverDJ

    SilverDJ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2014
    Messages:
    4,037
    Likes Received:
    1,252
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Australia
    Yes I do and have talked about it a lot on here.

    Yeah, and there would be just as much as saving accounts etc, yet no one is screaming that crying government is going to come and take that.
    Sure, they can eat away at it with taxes etc, and the same thing might be done to super, but once again, but it's limited, they aren't going to magically take it all, it's political suicide to touch people's super and savings.

    That's the thing, a lot of people seem to be bitching and moaning about super, that the government will take it, it's dead money, it won't be there when they retire etc. Yet it is 100% within your control, just get a SMSF and buy something with it, either a (commercial) property, or PM's. Something physical you have which they can never take away.
     

Share This Page