I never thought I’d be reliant on the pension when I got to be ancient but…there you go. Life is what it is. So when can I go on the pension, exactly?
65.
Oh, my Mum was much younger than that when she went on the pension, but I guess there are a lot more of us Baby Boomers now, so I guess it’s fair that the government [both Libs and Labor] would want to draw out the pension age.
Last time I checked, pensioners receive at least $100 more per week than the unemployed. $100 per week is $5,200 per year and more than $50,000 over ten years…
But wait! News just in: starting from July next year [2017] the eligible age for the pension will go up by six months every two years until it hits 67.
67?
Bangs head on desk. I can’t bear it. What if ‘they’ move the goal posts again? I may never get the pension…
-reads the criteria again-
Hang on a minute. It doesn’t say the pension age will go up by six months every six months! It’ll only go up once every two years, so…
-uses her fingers and toes-
It’s okay! I’ll only be 65 and a half when I become eligible!
-faints with relief-
All jokes aside, I did completely misread the eligibility criteria, and I know I’m not the only one so here’s a much easier to understand table of how the increase in the pension age will work:
The arrows are mine, the info. is from the Department of Human Services.
As a woman of a certain age -cough- I’m safe. Unless something radical happens in the next couple of years, I won’t have to wait until I’m 67 to get the pension, which is a huge relief. Now if only I could win the lottery and not have to rely on the pension at all…
Anyone know where I put that Tatts ticket?
cheers
Meeks
Meeka's Mind 
September 30th, 2016 at 12:04 am
That moving target is a little frightening. I’m glad you’re pension date is a known entity, but keep buying the lottery tickets 🙂
LikeLike
September 30th, 2016 at 8:59 am
lol – here’s hoping I won’t need them!
LikeLiked by 1 person
September 28th, 2016 at 8:29 am
The pension thing is tricky. Both Mike and I had agreed we never wanted to be kept alive on machines… But recently I told him there’s no way in hell I’d (EVER) unplug him while I’m still getting his pension check 😀 Oh well, so much for ideology.
LikeLike
September 28th, 2016 at 9:01 am
lmao – and /that/ is why I love being a single woman. :p
LikeLiked by 1 person
September 28th, 2016 at 9:23 am
go on… marry me and you too can be kept alive on machines!
LikeLike
September 28th, 2016 at 11:32 am
-flutters eyelids- what a shame you’re married already. Mike is such a lucky man…..:p
LikeLike
September 28th, 2016 at 4:40 am
Good luck! I am a little older than you and started collecting SS here in the United States at 66 (and 11 months I think, can’t remember exactly). The age for full benefits is going up every year. One big plus for me was the medical plan, which also helps. Yes, the lottery …. ! Cheers,
LikeLike
September 28th, 2016 at 9:03 am
Thanks – I did forget the medical benefits. Here in Australia we’re strongly ‘encouraged’ to have at least some private hospital insurance but that doesn’t cover visits to the GP for non life-threatening things!
LikeLike
September 27th, 2016 at 7:35 pm
In the USA one can collect Social Security as early as 62 but some people wait until 66 so they can get the full amount. For Americans a pension is something you get from your job. Money that the job set aside for you. Sadly most American companies now a days don’t do that any more. As a Baby Boomer we are the last generation who will get pensions unless you have a Union job. I’m lucky to have a Union job so I will return around 59 or 60. Work part-time then collect my Social Security at age 62. Not gonna wait until 66.
LikeLike
September 28th, 2016 at 9:07 am
Hmm…your Social Security sounds like our superannuation [govt. business and individual contribute to a self-funded pension plan] but we also have a fully government funded pension paid for by taxation. As I’ve never had ‘super’, that’s the only type of pension I’ll get. Would be happy to work if anyone was hiring people my age. -shrug- The world is full of catch-22’s.
LikeLike
September 27th, 2016 at 5:09 pm
Well done you… who knows for me. Currently I fall into the age 67 bracket. The G.O. slips into age 66 by a week but even for him, 5 years away and for me 16 years away it could have changed again. The whole ‘system’ around age pension & super is short on both hind & for sight. People don’t have the kind of super the government is assuming because it wasn’t in place in their eafly work days, initially it could be private company based -so if a company went bust so did the super $, even now Super Funds are cash -low interest- or risk-sharemarket based which are not guaranteed-underwritten by the government and not adequate for people who fall between the wage-salary fulltime employment cracks.
The pension age is based on the convenient but flawed assumptions that there are jobs for the taking up until super/pension age and that people will work for a ridiculous minimum wage.
All we can do is the best we can and wait it out because I think more & more people will vote with their feet. While we’ve been travelling we’ve met heaps of working age people who have had enough of the job-mortage wheel, said f*ck it, bought a van and hit the road. Or set themselves up in a modest lifestyle where they can live off government benefits. Because there just doesn’t seem to be a fair reward for sticking it out.
LikeLike
September 27th, 2016 at 7:20 pm
‘The pension age is based on the convenient but flawed assumptions that there are jobs for the taking…’
Spot on. From my mid-thirties onwards I was either working in my ex’s business or looking after elderly parents. No super here, yet I still have a house over my head so I’m one of the lucky ones. I really should start buying Tatts tickets…
LikeLike
September 27th, 2016 at 3:42 pm
I’m surprised they’ve waited to fully advertise the extension of the eligibility age. Over here that’s all the various gvmts have done regarding the disparity between the benefits avail to working age and non working age. I think it is mostly because of the voting demographic. Much as I want those of retirement age to have a decent income, I also want those younger, who are in low waged employment/not working, often through ill health to be supported. It’s a terrible balancing act that seems mostly to fail. Of course, I dont have a solution 😉
Good luck. I’m a 67er, but we expect it to be extended to 70 in the next 8 years for the next bracket.
LikeLike
September 27th, 2016 at 7:23 pm
Ouch…I hope not, for your sake. And yes, you’re right in what you say about protecting all parts of society. My problem with all the governments is that they cry ‘poor’ but spend billions on things that I, personally, consider a total waste of money. Collins class submarines anyone? -shakes head in disgust-
LikeLiked by 1 person
September 27th, 2016 at 7:25 pm
Absolutely.
LikeLike
September 27th, 2016 at 1:12 pm
Before 1.7.1952 does that mean you get a pension at 65 or are there still remnants that can get the pension at 60?
xxx Huge Hugs xxx
LikeLike
September 27th, 2016 at 7:26 pm
Oh…I’m not sure. I know that for me it will be 65.5 but what happens to women older than me…no idea. I hope that for them, the pension age remains at the level they were expecting. It’s horrible feeling as if you’re on shifting sand, especially as finding jobs is next to impossible. 😦
LikeLike