Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

This conversation has generated a fair bit of conversation so I think it’s worth elaborating on. There is a common misconception that superannuation is decreasing the number of retirees on the pension. As per ASFA figures attached in comments - the median balance for men and women aged 60-64...

RennickGBR's profile picture

Gerard Rennick

106,870 subscribers

44,183 views • 5 months ago •via X (Twitter)

EducationNews & PoliticsFinance
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

IGNORE SUPERANNUATION MISINFORMATION Further to yesterday’s post I think it’s important to dispel a few myths about superannuation going on some of the misinformed comments. 1. For low to middle income earners, putting money into superannuation comes at the expense of owning your own house. Having money in superannuation account when you retire is secondary to owning your own house. The Government has no right to deny people from owning their own home and that’s what compulsory superannuation does. 2. Superannuation comes out of wages. Paul Keating and Bill Kelty designed superannuation in a way that wage rises were paid into superannuation not into workers pockets. Please read the link below in which Paul Keating explains how he did this. It was very sly and very deceptive. 3. Finally Superannuation is not going to take pressure off the budget - Superannuation tax concessions are over $60 billion which is almost the same as the cost of the pension of $65 billion. The only winners out of super are grifters like the Labor party who are destroying the great Australian dream. If you want to take control of your retirement sign up today at
3:22

IGNORE SUPERANNUATION MISINFORMATION Further to yesterday’s post I think it’s important to dispel a few myths about superannuation going on some of the misinformed comments. 1. For low to middle income earners, putting money into superannuation comes at the expense of owning your own house. Having money in superannuation account when you retire is secondary to owning your own house. The Government has no right to deny people from owning their own home and that’s what compulsory superannuation does. 2. Superannuation comes out of wages. Paul Keating and Bill Kelty designed superannuation in a way that wage rises were paid into superannuation not into workers pockets. Please read the link below in which Paul Keating explains how he did this. It was very sly and very deceptive. 3. Finally Superannuation is not going to take pressure off the budget - Superannuation tax concessions are over $60 billion which is almost the same as the cost of the pension of $65 billion. The only winners out of super are grifters like the Labor party who are destroying the great Australian dream. If you want to take control of your retirement sign up today at

Gerard Rennick

43,363 views • 14 days ago

Debt is killing the Australian dream of owning your own home. This is having a devasting impact on the birth rate, cost of living and retirement plans. This has been driven by decades of financial mismanagement by governments and the RBA. Despite many people working longer than ever, Superannuation is not reducing the number of retirees on the pension. If you want to see change then sign up to today. We have the solutions for today and the vision for tomorrow that will put you and your family first. •••••••••••••••••••••••••• “As a result of people purchasing later and taking out larger mortgages, Loan Market Group has found that 40% of respondents do not expect to have paid off their mortgages by the time they retire. This analysis aligns with warnings from the Super Members Council of Australia, which estimated that more than 40% of Australians will retire with mortgage debt, up from 16% two decades ago. To exacerbate the situation, 40% of individuals and 33% of couples will utilise their entire superannuation savings to pay off their debts.”
1:21

Debt is killing the Australian dream of owning your own home. This is having a devasting impact on the birth rate, cost of living and retirement plans. This has been driven by decades of financial mismanagement by governments and the RBA. Despite many people working longer than ever, Superannuation is not reducing the number of retirees on the pension. If you want to see change then sign up to today. We have the solutions for today and the vision for tomorrow that will put you and your family first. •••••••••••••••••••••••••• “As a result of people purchasing later and taking out larger mortgages, Loan Market Group has found that 40% of respondents do not expect to have paid off their mortgages by the time they retire. This analysis aligns with warnings from the Super Members Council of Australia, which estimated that more than 40% of Australians will retire with mortgage debt, up from 16% two decades ago. To exacerbate the situation, 40% of individuals and 33% of couples will utilise their entire superannuation savings to pay off their debts.”

Gerard Rennick

17,510 views • 2 months ago

It’s time the people took back control of their money. Superannuation is centralised wealth controlled by a few boards who aren’t elected by the people. Nothing encapsulates just how dumb witted the neoliberals in the Liberal party are than superannuation. At the same time neoliberals like Howard and Hewson were sprucing free market ideology, the communists in the Labor party introduced Superannuation. A very clever way to get control of most Australians savings whilst enslaving them to even more debt. Rather than defend the right of people to control how they spend their money, when Howard and Costello took office in 1996 they actually increased the rate of superannuation rather than abolish it. By 2002 the rate of Superannuation had jumped to 9%. They did this because of pressure from the big banks who also saw the money that could be made by clipping the ticket on superannuation. CBA bought Colonial Mutual, NAB bought National Mutual, Westpac bought Bankers Trust and ANZ did a joint venture with ING. In short both parties sold out to the big end of town - big unions and big banks. Today 40% of people retire with a mortgage (up from 10% in 1992) yet the same percentage of retirees (50%) are still on a full pension. A trillion dollars of your superannuation is invested offshore. The only winners out of this are the paper shufflers in the big city ivory palaces who skim $30 billion a year out of superannuation in fees and use the $3 trillion of your capital to promote ideology not productivity. The losers are the people. #auspol
2:19

It’s time the people took back control of their money. Superannuation is centralised wealth controlled by a few boards who aren’t elected by the people. Nothing encapsulates just how dumb witted the neoliberals in the Liberal party are than superannuation. At the same time neoliberals like Howard and Hewson were sprucing free market ideology, the communists in the Labor party introduced Superannuation. A very clever way to get control of most Australians savings whilst enslaving them to even more debt. Rather than defend the right of people to control how they spend their money, when Howard and Costello took office in 1996 they actually increased the rate of superannuation rather than abolish it. By 2002 the rate of Superannuation had jumped to 9%. They did this because of pressure from the big banks who also saw the money that could be made by clipping the ticket on superannuation. CBA bought Colonial Mutual, NAB bought National Mutual, Westpac bought Bankers Trust and ANZ did a joint venture with ING. In short both parties sold out to the big end of town - big unions and big banks. Today 40% of people retire with a mortgage (up from 10% in 1992) yet the same percentage of retirees (50%) are still on a full pension. A trillion dollars of your superannuation is invested offshore. The only winners out of this are the paper shufflers in the big city ivory palaces who skim $30 billion a year out of superannuation in fees and use the $3 trillion of your capital to promote ideology not productivity. The losers are the people. #auspol

Gerard Rennick

66,879 views • 2 years ago

People are drowning in debt “Australia’s retirement system has been based on the presumption that the overwhelming majority of people would own their homes outright upon retirement. However, due to declining homeownership rates, Australians buying homes later, and carrying larger mortgages into retirement, that assumption is clearly crumbling. Westpac notes that people over the age of 40 accounted for around 20% of mortgage loans issued to first-home buyers in 2025. As a result of people purchasing later and taking out larger mortgages, Loan Market Group has found that 40% of respondents do not expect to have paid off their mortgages by the time they retire. This analysis aligns with warnings from the Super Members Council of Australia, which estimated that more than 40% of Australians will retire with mortgage debt, up from 16% two decades ago.” ••••••••••••••••••••••••• People First has been the only party talking about the fact that 40% of people who retiree haven’t paid off their mortgage. This figure is based from ABS numbers now five years old so the figures are probably worse. These people end up cashing out their super and going on the pension this wasting billions on Superannuation fees for nothing. No other party wants to tackle our financial system except People First. We will: • Reintroduce capital controls to stop house inflation • Bring back a public bank • Start an Infrastructure Bank • Bring back a Government Insurance Office • Allow young people to keep their superannuation so they can buy a house • Cut immigration It’s time to put the Australian People First.
1:39

People are drowning in debt “Australia’s retirement system has been based on the presumption that the overwhelming majority of people would own their homes outright upon retirement. However, due to declining homeownership rates, Australians buying homes later, and carrying larger mortgages into retirement, that assumption is clearly crumbling. Westpac notes that people over the age of 40 accounted for around 20% of mortgage loans issued to first-home buyers in 2025. As a result of people purchasing later and taking out larger mortgages, Loan Market Group has found that 40% of respondents do not expect to have paid off their mortgages by the time they retire. This analysis aligns with warnings from the Super Members Council of Australia, which estimated that more than 40% of Australians will retire with mortgage debt, up from 16% two decades ago.” ••••••••••••••••••••••••• People First has been the only party talking about the fact that 40% of people who retiree haven’t paid off their mortgage. This figure is based from ABS numbers now five years old so the figures are probably worse. These people end up cashing out their super and going on the pension this wasting billions on Superannuation fees for nothing. No other party wants to tackle our financial system except People First. We will: • Reintroduce capital controls to stop house inflation • Bring back a public bank • Start an Infrastructure Bank • Bring back a Government Insurance Office • Allow young people to keep their superannuation so they can buy a house • Cut immigration It’s time to put the Australian People First.

Gerard Rennick

13,494 views • 4 months ago

COMPULSORY SUPERANNUATION MUST END - WE MUST STOP WEAPONISING OUR ENEMIES AND START EMPOWERING WORKING AUSTRALIANS Yesterday Pauline Hanson quite rightly said that people should be able to access their superannuation only to then clarify her remarks by saying she still supports compulsory superannuation. You can’t support both positions. Either people can keep their wages to make ends meet, or they can’t. Anyone who has tried to access their superannuation early knows that there is a mountain of paperwork to manage and unintended fees and taxes. The idea people need permission to access their super early to make ends meet is just cruel and inhumane. For too long conservative parties have been too weak when it comes to standing up to compulsory superannuation. It’s not achieving its aim of significantly reducing the percentage of retirees on the pension but it is making it harder for people to make ends meet or buy a home. The Labor party love superannuation because it is a river of gold for the union movement that use it to milk fees and push their ideology. People First is not unequivocal about compulsory superannuation. We want to end it once and for all and let Australians save for their retirement in the best way possible by allowing them to own their own home as soon as possible. We will do that making superannuation voluntary, allow unlimited contributions and withdrawals and make the first $25,000 earned in superannuation tax free regardless of your age. To help us free you from government control sign up today at
4:40

COMPULSORY SUPERANNUATION MUST END - WE MUST STOP WEAPONISING OUR ENEMIES AND START EMPOWERING WORKING AUSTRALIANS Yesterday Pauline Hanson quite rightly said that people should be able to access their superannuation only to then clarify her remarks by saying she still supports compulsory superannuation. You can’t support both positions. Either people can keep their wages to make ends meet, or they can’t. Anyone who has tried to access their superannuation early knows that there is a mountain of paperwork to manage and unintended fees and taxes. The idea people need permission to access their super early to make ends meet is just cruel and inhumane. For too long conservative parties have been too weak when it comes to standing up to compulsory superannuation. It’s not achieving its aim of significantly reducing the percentage of retirees on the pension but it is making it harder for people to make ends meet or buy a home. The Labor party love superannuation because it is a river of gold for the union movement that use it to milk fees and push their ideology. People First is not unequivocal about compulsory superannuation. We want to end it once and for all and let Australians save for their retirement in the best way possible by allowing them to own their own home as soon as possible. We will do that making superannuation voluntary, allow unlimited contributions and withdrawals and make the first $25,000 earned in superannuation tax free regardless of your age. To help us free you from government control sign up today at

Gerard Rennick

35,362 views • 15 days ago

“In 2023 alone, Australians paid more than $32 billion in fees to super funds, according to Rainmaker data. While regulatory guidelines exist for disclosure documents, there is no standardised way for super funds to present fees on websites, social media, or advertising materials. This inconsistency makes it difficult for consumers to compare funds and make informed choices.” •••••••••••• In light of today’s interest rate rise we need to ask which political party has the actual skill set to balance the books in this country. It’s People First and here’s why. The 6% interest you pay on your home loan is after tax. That is equivalent to around 8.5% pretax if you pay 30 cents in the dollar tax, and almost 12% pretax if you’re on the top bracket of 47%. Do you think the average superannuation funds pays that sort of return - no way. And don’t forget that superannuation fees cost another 1% of your balance. People First is going to let Australians keep their superannuation so they can pay their mortgage off faster. The current system only favours the financial industry which get to clip both your home loan and your superannuation. Australia doesn’t need any more financial engineers in this country - we need real engineers- civil, mechanical and electrical - which is why we are going to bring back the military apprenticeship scheme. Because at the end of the day you can build a financial system with paper promises, but you can’t build a better future for our children if they don’t own their own home.
1:13

“In 2023 alone, Australians paid more than $32 billion in fees to super funds, according to Rainmaker data. While regulatory guidelines exist for disclosure documents, there is no standardised way for super funds to present fees on websites, social media, or advertising materials. This inconsistency makes it difficult for consumers to compare funds and make informed choices.” •••••••••••• In light of today’s interest rate rise we need to ask which political party has the actual skill set to balance the books in this country. It’s People First and here’s why. The 6% interest you pay on your home loan is after tax. That is equivalent to around 8.5% pretax if you pay 30 cents in the dollar tax, and almost 12% pretax if you’re on the top bracket of 47%. Do you think the average superannuation funds pays that sort of return - no way. And don’t forget that superannuation fees cost another 1% of your balance. People First is going to let Australians keep their superannuation so they can pay their mortgage off faster. The current system only favours the financial industry which get to clip both your home loan and your superannuation. Australia doesn’t need any more financial engineers in this country - we need real engineers- civil, mechanical and electrical - which is why we are going to bring back the military apprenticeship scheme. Because at the end of the day you can build a financial system with paper promises, but you can’t build a better future for our children if they don’t own their own home.

Gerard Rennick

29,445 views • 7 months ago

Well waddayaknow! More superannuation ticket clipping. Labor is going to put a levy on Self Managed Super Funds on top of other funds to cover the losses caused by shonky financial engineers. I thought the whole point of super was that people were supposed to take responsibility for saving for their own retirement? Of course that was always a lie as people were never asked if they wanted to hand their wages over to shonky financial engineers in the first place at a cost of $40 billion per annum in administrative costs. If people have to bail out other people then shouldn’t we just provide a strong pension system as a safety net rather than subsidise poor behaviour by the superannuation industry? If Australia wants to starting heading in the right direction we need to stop propping up the enormous power of the institutions which are the pure definition of socialists who spend your money and start protecting individuals who are the true capitalists. To put the people first instead of the establishment, sign up at ••••••••••••••• “Dr Mulino is also expected to announce changes to the widely panned Compensation Scheme of Last Resort, including removing the controversial 'but for' provision that sees victims of financial misconduct compensated for hypothetical losses. The CSLR hands up to $150,000 in compensation to victims of financial misconduct when the responsible firm is insolvent. As well, Dr Mulino is expected to bring SMSFs into the CSLR funding umbrella as the scheme faces a shortfall of $170m for the 2027 financial year. A special levy will apply to parts of the sector, including SMSFs and APRA-regulated funds, as well as others.”
1:09

Well waddayaknow! More superannuation ticket clipping. Labor is going to put a levy on Self Managed Super Funds on top of other funds to cover the losses caused by shonky financial engineers. I thought the whole point of super was that people were supposed to take responsibility for saving for their own retirement? Of course that was always a lie as people were never asked if they wanted to hand their wages over to shonky financial engineers in the first place at a cost of $40 billion per annum in administrative costs. If people have to bail out other people then shouldn’t we just provide a strong pension system as a safety net rather than subsidise poor behaviour by the superannuation industry? If Australia wants to starting heading in the right direction we need to stop propping up the enormous power of the institutions which are the pure definition of socialists who spend your money and start protecting individuals who are the true capitalists. To put the people first instead of the establishment, sign up at ••••••••••••••• “Dr Mulino is also expected to announce changes to the widely panned Compensation Scheme of Last Resort, including removing the controversial 'but for' provision that sees victims of financial misconduct compensated for hypothetical losses. The CSLR hands up to $150,000 in compensation to victims of financial misconduct when the responsible firm is insolvent. As well, Dr Mulino is expected to bring SMSFs into the CSLR funding umbrella as the scheme faces a shortfall of $170m for the 2027 financial year. A special levy will apply to parts of the sector, including SMSFs and APRA-regulated funds, as well as others.”

Gerard Rennick

39,702 views • 21 days ago

It seems Amaany doesn’t fully understand how pensions work. Mohamed Nasheed didn’t introduce 5,000 MVR old age benefit as a permanent allowance for all Maldivians. Before his time, there was no contributory retirement pension system. So, he introduced one (7% employee, 7% employer), along with the 5,000 MVR benefit as an immediate measure to support those who weren’t receiving any retirement pension. Cause back then only gov employees were getting it. The idea is that everyone should contribute to their retirement pension fund while they are working. The full benefits of this system will be felt in about 50 years, when most people will receive a pension from their own savings. Only a small percentage of people, those who are not part of the retirement pension, will continue receiving the 5,000 MVR from the gov. In 50 years, parents won’t have to depend on the gov or their children for financial support in old age. They will be funding their own retirement through the pension system. So, the 5,000 MVR old age benefit is not a permanent allowance for everyone. It was designed to help those who wouldn’t otherwise have a pension and over time, fewer people will rely on it. This is a sustainable system. Cause people fund their own retirement from own savings.
2:37

It seems Amaany doesn’t fully understand how pensions work. Mohamed Nasheed didn’t introduce 5,000 MVR old age benefit as a permanent allowance for all Maldivians. Before his time, there was no contributory retirement pension system. So, he introduced one (7% employee, 7% employer), along with the 5,000 MVR benefit as an immediate measure to support those who weren’t receiving any retirement pension. Cause back then only gov employees were getting it. The idea is that everyone should contribute to their retirement pension fund while they are working. The full benefits of this system will be felt in about 50 years, when most people will receive a pension from their own savings. Only a small percentage of people, those who are not part of the retirement pension, will continue receiving the 5,000 MVR from the gov. In 50 years, parents won’t have to depend on the gov or their children for financial support in old age. They will be funding their own retirement through the pension system. So, the 5,000 MVR old age benefit is not a permanent allowance for everyone. It was designed to help those who wouldn’t otherwise have a pension and over time, fewer people will rely on it. This is a sustainable system. Cause people fund their own retirement from own savings.

Hassan Kurusee

55,547 views • 1 year ago

Sonia Sodha, "The state pension has gone up, but the threshold that young people have to repay their student loans has been frozen" "Graduates in their 20s and 30s pay an extra 9% of income tax" "There are people in their 20s that will never own their own home" "They're going to get to retirement in the private rented sector. It's overpriced, its bad value. They won't have enough money in their pension and all of a sudden they won't have anywhere to live because they haven't bought a house and they haven't paid off their mortgage" "Young people are facing a crisis in terms of the world they're going out into" "My worry is the political parties are tinkering on the edges of this" #BBCQT
1:14

Sonia Sodha, "The state pension has gone up, but the threshold that young people have to repay their student loans has been frozen" "Graduates in their 20s and 30s pay an extra 9% of income tax" "There are people in their 20s that will never own their own home" "They're going to get to retirement in the private rented sector. It's overpriced, its bad value. They won't have enough money in their pension and all of a sudden they won't have anywhere to live because they haven't bought a house and they haven't paid off their mortgage" "Young people are facing a crisis in terms of the world they're going out into" "My worry is the political parties are tinkering on the edges of this" #BBCQT

Farrukh

147,496 views • 9 months ago

I recently gave a speech in the chamber on why Superannuation is a scam. People were never given a say by Paul Keating as to whether or not they wanted to give up their wages nor are they allowed to vote for board members. This is just wrong. People should be allowed to decide how their wages are used and secondly if they are forced to hand over their wages, then they should be allowed to vote for the board that manages their money. Both major parties have supported superannuation over the last three decades as they always back the establishment over the individual. will make superannuation voluntary and make superannuation boards hold elections so members can have a say as to how their money is managed. It’s time we put the PeopleFirst. #auspol
2:19

I recently gave a speech in the chamber on why Superannuation is a scam. People were never given a say by Paul Keating as to whether or not they wanted to give up their wages nor are they allowed to vote for board members. This is just wrong. People should be allowed to decide how their wages are used and secondly if they are forced to hand over their wages, then they should be allowed to vote for the board that manages their money. Both major parties have supported superannuation over the last three decades as they always back the establishment over the individual. will make superannuation voluntary and make superannuation boards hold elections so members can have a say as to how their money is managed. It’s time we put the PeopleFirst. #auspol

Gerard Rennick

32,549 views • 1 year ago

The media is at it again taking One Nation’s words out of context and making up headlines. Here are my full comments on superannuation this morning, so you get it straight from me and not twisted through the mainstream media. While Australians are in the middle of a cost of living crisis and struggling to pay their mortgage, they are being forced to lock away 12% of their weekly pay. I’m not calling for an “end” to compulsory super as the media has falsely claimed. But Australians should be able to access their money more easily if they need it for a house, medical needs or other costs. Your superannuation belongs to you. It does not belong to the government and it does not belong to the super funds.
1:33

The media is at it again taking One Nation’s words out of context and making up headlines. Here are my full comments on superannuation this morning, so you get it straight from me and not twisted through the mainstream media. While Australians are in the middle of a cost of living crisis and struggling to pay their mortgage, they are being forced to lock away 12% of their weekly pay. I’m not calling for an “end” to compulsory super as the media has falsely claimed. But Australians should be able to access their money more easily if they need it for a house, medical needs or other costs. Your superannuation belongs to you. It does not belong to the government and it does not belong to the super funds.

Pauline Hanson 🇦🇺

94,828 views • 16 days ago

I can’t begin to describe how disgraceful this government are when it comes to sneaky tax rises and raiding the pockets of families. Were you aware that your Pension savings, which were previously exempt are now going to be subject to 40% Inheritance tax. So where previously your pension would go tax free to your grieving spouse and family, it’s now gonna fall foul of IHT. Even worse the pension company are allowed to hold on to 50% of the pension for up to 15 months. Inheritance tax is totally immoral anyway but now it will apply to even more people in money they thought was safe.
4:04

I can’t begin to describe how disgraceful this government are when it comes to sneaky tax rises and raiding the pockets of families. Were you aware that your Pension savings, which were previously exempt are now going to be subject to 40% Inheritance tax. So where previously your pension would go tax free to your grieving spouse and family, it’s now gonna fall foul of IHT. Even worse the pension company are allowed to hold on to 50% of the pension for up to 15 months. Inheritance tax is totally immoral anyway but now it will apply to even more people in money they thought was safe.

John Hannam

39,534 views • 3 months ago

A myopic analysis. The state pension was contributory (see clip), and very gradually and quietly, over time, that situation changed. Adair Turner’s 2002 tome even refers to the state pension as “an entitlement”. The people were actively told that if you built up a NIC record, you will get the appropriate state pension, but the people were not told that changed, because the change was quietly buried over time within acts of parliament and not referred to. Did government not learn from WASPI? At least when women had their state pension age changed, it was widely promulgated. This though, changed because the government wanted you to think that in the future that your state pension would be a privilege, and not an entitlement. Because then of course, the state can tell you that you don’t get one, and it then has a tighter hold over you. The state did not tell you when it slowly started to change it from being a contributory scheme to a non-contributory scheme, because it wanted the best of both worlds. It knew, when it started to change things, but all hell would break loose if people realised the state pension was going to be something to be a carrot and stick, and not an entitlement.
0:30

A myopic analysis. The state pension was contributory (see clip), and very gradually and quietly, over time, that situation changed. Adair Turner’s 2002 tome even refers to the state pension as “an entitlement”. The people were actively told that if you built up a NIC record, you will get the appropriate state pension, but the people were not told that changed, because the change was quietly buried over time within acts of parliament and not referred to. Did government not learn from WASPI? At least when women had their state pension age changed, it was widely promulgated. This though, changed because the government wanted you to think that in the future that your state pension would be a privilege, and not an entitlement. Because then of course, the state can tell you that you don’t get one, and it then has a tighter hold over you. The state did not tell you when it slowly started to change it from being a contributory scheme to a non-contributory scheme, because it wanted the best of both worlds. It knew, when it started to change things, but all hell would break loose if people realised the state pension was going to be something to be a carrot and stick, and not an entitlement.

Rush

21,263 views • 5 months ago

Left: Jeremy Hunt, "£100,000 a year doesn't go as far as you might think" Right: Jeremy Hunt, "There are 1,000,000 pensioners whose only income is from the state.. The full new state pension is £221 a week (£10,608 a year)" UK Pensioners will earn 1/10 of the income level which Jeremy Hunt says 'doesn't go as far as you might think' £844 - UK's state pension £1,412 - Norway's state pension £1,564 - France's state pension £1,651 - Denmark's state pension £1,893 - Iceland's state pension £2,148 - Switzerland's state pension £2,698 - Belgium's state pension £2,709 - Spain's state pension £5,201 - Luxembourg's state pension Brexit Britain's world-beating state pension 🤷‍♂️ "977,386 over 66 years old were experiencing deprivation. The highest number since comparable records began. Deprivation measures: whether they had access to basic goods and services, including substantial meals, heating and electricity, a home that was in a good state of repair, and contact with friends and family at least once a month"
0:42

Left: Jeremy Hunt, "£100,000 a year doesn't go as far as you might think" Right: Jeremy Hunt, "There are 1,000,000 pensioners whose only income is from the state.. The full new state pension is £221 a week (£10,608 a year)" UK Pensioners will earn 1/10 of the income level which Jeremy Hunt says 'doesn't go as far as you might think' £844 - UK's state pension £1,412 - Norway's state pension £1,564 - France's state pension £1,651 - Denmark's state pension £1,893 - Iceland's state pension £2,148 - Switzerland's state pension £2,698 - Belgium's state pension £2,709 - Spain's state pension £5,201 - Luxembourg's state pension Brexit Britain's world-beating state pension 🤷‍♂️ "977,386 over 66 years old were experiencing deprivation. The highest number since comparable records began. Deprivation measures: whether they had access to basic goods and services, including substantial meals, heating and electricity, a home that was in a good state of repair, and contact with friends and family at least once a month"

Farrukh

407,253 views • 2 years ago

Hon'ble Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi had in January 2025 approved the establishment of the 8th Central Pay Commission (CPC) to revise the salaries and benefits of Central Government employees and pensioners. All Central Government pensioners who had retired before 1.1.2016 are receiving pension at par with employees who retired after 1.1.2016. Keeping in view the recommendations which were made by the 6th CPC, a distinction among pensioners is inevitable and that is what is being brought in as an amendment and by way of validation. The validation rules DO NOT, in any way, change or alter the existing pensions so fixed of existing Civil Pensioners from the present stage. The validation rules also DO NOT affect Defense Pensioners in any way as they are covered by separate rules. It is not an amendment to any pension Rules or instructions but only a reaffirmation of the same w.e.f. 1st June, 1972, i.e. the date the CCS (Pension) Rules were promulgated. The 6th Central Pay Commission made a distinction between the retirees of pre-1.1.2006 and those of post-1.1.2006 periods. The then-Government (Congress-led UPA) had accepted the recommendations of 6th Central Pay Commission and decided that there will be a distinction between pensioners with reference to the cut-off date of 1.1.2006. The 7th Central Pay Commission has brought in parity between pre 1.1.2016 and post 1.1.2016 Pensioners. I again reiterate that this is only a Validation of existing rules. This DOES NOT alter or change existing civil or defense pension. - Smt Nirmala Sitharaman in Rajya Sabha
4:39

Hon'ble Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi had in January 2025 approved the establishment of the 8th Central Pay Commission (CPC) to revise the salaries and benefits of Central Government employees and pensioners. All Central Government pensioners who had retired before 1.1.2016 are receiving pension at par with employees who retired after 1.1.2016. Keeping in view the recommendations which were made by the 6th CPC, a distinction among pensioners is inevitable and that is what is being brought in as an amendment and by way of validation. The validation rules DO NOT, in any way, change or alter the existing pensions so fixed of existing Civil Pensioners from the present stage. The validation rules also DO NOT affect Defense Pensioners in any way as they are covered by separate rules. It is not an amendment to any pension Rules or instructions but only a reaffirmation of the same w.e.f. 1st June, 1972, i.e. the date the CCS (Pension) Rules were promulgated. The 6th Central Pay Commission made a distinction between the retirees of pre-1.1.2006 and those of post-1.1.2006 periods. The then-Government (Congress-led UPA) had accepted the recommendations of 6th Central Pay Commission and decided that there will be a distinction between pensioners with reference to the cut-off date of 1.1.2006. The 7th Central Pay Commission has brought in parity between pre 1.1.2016 and post 1.1.2016 Pensioners. I again reiterate that this is only a Validation of existing rules. This DOES NOT alter or change existing civil or defense pension. - Smt Nirmala Sitharaman in Rajya Sabha

Nirmala Sitharaman Office

39,629 views • 1 year ago

Unsurprisingly Labor has rolled out the fear campaign around keeping your wages. Never tried to get between the Labor Party and their rivers of gold from superannuation. No one does fear like the Labor party so if you’re going to threaten their grifting you need to come prepared. One Nation have left themselves wide open to Labor’s fear campaign by not having a clear policy alternative to compulsory superannuation. Labor are claiming house prices will rise if people can access their super. Whilst this may be a possibly it doesn’t have to occur if the right guardrails are put in. The easiest way to solve this issue is by lifting the minimum deposit required to buy a house. By doing this home buyers will end up with greater equity rather than more debt. Currently people can buy a house with a 5% deposit, meaning you only need $50,000 to buy a million dollar house. If the minimum deposit was increased to 10% you would need $100,000 to buy the same house. The increased equity can come from superannuation rather than taking on more debt. Minimum deposits used to be a lot higher to stop people from over leveraging into housing. Unfortunately lending standards were relaxed which has resulted in many people being unable to pay off their mortgage by the time they are retired. This of course ensured the working class stay entrapped to never ending mortgage payments. People First intends to slowly increase the minimum deposit required for a loan once superannuation becomes voluntary to stop people from borrowing too much money. The upside to this is that by keeping all of your wage including superannuation you will be able to save for the deposit much quicker, ensuring you have greater equity in your home and less debt to tie you down over your working career. If you want a political party that understands monetary policy and can use that to empower you and your family financially then please sign up at today.
3:48

Unsurprisingly Labor has rolled out the fear campaign around keeping your wages. Never tried to get between the Labor Party and their rivers of gold from superannuation. No one does fear like the Labor party so if you’re going to threaten their grifting you need to come prepared. One Nation have left themselves wide open to Labor’s fear campaign by not having a clear policy alternative to compulsory superannuation. Labor are claiming house prices will rise if people can access their super. Whilst this may be a possibly it doesn’t have to occur if the right guardrails are put in. The easiest way to solve this issue is by lifting the minimum deposit required to buy a house. By doing this home buyers will end up with greater equity rather than more debt. Currently people can buy a house with a 5% deposit, meaning you only need $50,000 to buy a million dollar house. If the minimum deposit was increased to 10% you would need $100,000 to buy the same house. The increased equity can come from superannuation rather than taking on more debt. Minimum deposits used to be a lot higher to stop people from over leveraging into housing. Unfortunately lending standards were relaxed which has resulted in many people being unable to pay off their mortgage by the time they are retired. This of course ensured the working class stay entrapped to never ending mortgage payments. People First intends to slowly increase the minimum deposit required for a loan once superannuation becomes voluntary to stop people from borrowing too much money. The upside to this is that by keeping all of your wage including superannuation you will be able to save for the deposit much quicker, ensuring you have greater equity in your home and less debt to tie you down over your working career. If you want a political party that understands monetary policy and can use that to empower you and your family financially then please sign up at today.

Gerard Rennick

16,137 views • 11 days ago

.@RepMattGaetz introduces an amendment to halt Ukraine War funding, warning that the Biden admin is sleepwalking into a world war, US taxpayers fund Ukraine's pensions amidst a US pension crisis while the Pentagon has no accountability despite billion dollar accounting errors. "The Biden administration is sleepwalking our great country into a world war. The American people did not sign up for this. And I believe Congress needs to have the solemnity to be able to stop this madness. I missed the days when Democrats used to be anti war... I do not want to go to war with Russia. I don't think the American people do either and that does not make anyone pro-Putin.... In this country we have cops, firefighters, teachers who wonder if there pension fund is going to be sufficient to cover their life for the service that they have given. While that is a question in our country, it is no question in Ukraine, because the American taxpayer is underwriting all of the pensions for every government official in Ukraine, and we don't do that for the people who put out fires and protect our streets. Similarly, how can we continue to send all of this money when there is a lack of accountability? The Pentagon has to fess up that they have multibillion dollar accounting errors in this space." Should the US government pursue peace through diplomatic means or continue providing funding to Ukraine in its proxy war against Russia?
3:15

.@RepMattGaetz introduces an amendment to halt Ukraine War funding, warning that the Biden admin is sleepwalking into a world war, US taxpayers fund Ukraine's pensions amidst a US pension crisis while the Pentagon has no accountability despite billion dollar accounting errors. "The Biden administration is sleepwalking our great country into a world war. The American people did not sign up for this. And I believe Congress needs to have the solemnity to be able to stop this madness. I missed the days when Democrats used to be anti war... I do not want to go to war with Russia. I don't think the American people do either and that does not make anyone pro-Putin.... In this country we have cops, firefighters, teachers who wonder if there pension fund is going to be sufficient to cover their life for the service that they have given. While that is a question in our country, it is no question in Ukraine, because the American taxpayer is underwriting all of the pensions for every government official in Ukraine, and we don't do that for the people who put out fires and protect our streets. Similarly, how can we continue to send all of this money when there is a lack of accountability? The Pentagon has to fess up that they have multibillion dollar accounting errors in this space." Should the US government pursue peace through diplomatic means or continue providing funding to Ukraine in its proxy war against Russia?

KanekoaTheGreat

844,763 views • 3 years ago