From the we can't get out of our own wavefile comes The question has posed this week by the Retirement Commissioner as to whether the people who have money in the bank should get the pension. Now, the first part that is wrong with that is I thought we had decided many a decade ago, rightly or wrongly, super is an entitlement. It's trigger rightly or wrongly is age. Therefore, the other criteria that you might like to at a later stage add to the equation, I don't know height, weight, job, brain power or savings are null and void because age is what triggers it. So are we changing that? Are we all of a sudden because that's the inference in the question. The inference is also this sneering socialist bent that some people have around success. Well, don't be too successful, and that's what savings generally are. You had a plan, you worked hard, you put a few dollars aside. Interestingly, the numbers are depressing. This is where the question comes from. There are three or thirty three thousand who earn each year between one hundred and two hundred thousand dollars a year, nine thousand more than two hundred thousand. Now that's actually not a lot of peace people. It shows you how poorly paid we are in this country, how bad at saving we are, how expensive life is. To stop your saving in the first place, a whole bunch of stuff leads us to not being a very well off sort of country. Personally, I've said this many many times. I'm not fast do whatever you want with superannuation. I didn't join KEYI saver. I'm not relying on a pension. Why Because when I started work in nineteen eighty two it was very well established even then that the pension may or may not be around at all. So why take the risk in a nineteen eighty two as I was on the minimum wage, as I basically worked out, I had forty fivesh years to get my act together and do something about it. The problem with keeping on asking these questions is it messes with people and their intentions. Governments been bad enough already with their constant changing of the rules and their contributions. Last thing we need is thought bubbles on what should be really a long term leave it alone, get out of the way. Understanding among us all that the pension is our society's recognition of a life's work, change the age if you want, but penalizing success is the opposite of what we want to actually promote. For more from The Mic Asking Breakfast, listen live to news Talks it B from six am weekdays, or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio.

From the we can't get out of our own wavefile comes The question has posed this week by the Retirement Commissioner as to whether the people who have money in the bank should get the pension. Now, the first part that is wrong with that is I thought we had decided many a decade ago, rightly or wrongly, super is an entitlement. It's trigger rightly or wrongly is age. Therefore, the other criteria that you might like to at a later stage add to the equation, I don't know height, weight, job, brain power or savings are null and void because age is what triggers it. So are we changing that? Are we all of a sudden because that's the inference in the question. The inference is also this sneering socialist bent that some people have around success. Well, don't be too successful, and that's what savings generally are. You had a plan, you worked hard, you put a few dollars aside. Interestingly, the numbers are depressing. This is where the question comes from. There are three or thirty three thousand who earn each year between one hundred and two hundred thousand dollars a year, nine thousand more than two hundred thousand. Now that's actually not a lot of peace people. It shows you how poorly paid we are in this country, how bad at saving we are, how expensive life is. To stop your saving in the first place, a whole bunch of stuff leads us to not being a very well off sort of country. Personally, I've said this many many times. I'm not fast do whatever you want with superannuation. I didn't join KEYI saver. I'm not relying on a pension. Why Because when I started work in nineteen eighty two it was very well established even then that the pension may or may not be around at all. So why take the risk in a nineteen eighty two as I was on the minimum wage, as I basically worked out, I had forty fivesh years to get my act together and do something about it. The problem with keeping on asking these questions is it messes with people and their intentions. Governments been bad enough already with their constant changing of the rules and their contributions. Last thing we need is thought bubbles on what should be really a long term leave it alone, get out of the way. Understanding among us all that the pension is our society's recognition of a life's work, change the age if you want, but penalizing success is the opposite of what we want to actually promote. For more from The Mic Asking Breakfast, listen live to news Talks it B from six am weekdays, or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio.