Superannuation should be income and asset tested so that only those who need it get it?
On average, everyone disagrees with significant nonconsensus between 228 voters.
Please read the comments from other voters below, then scroll down make your decision. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
Superannuation should be income and asset tested so that only those who need it get it
Reasons To Disagree
Income AND asset tested: thats rude, you pay taxes all your life, then when the government is supposed to by paying you back they say, nah, your house is too big, and the boarder is making you too much money. rude.
19 September 2005
Here we go again. Those people who have worked hard, saved for their retirement - by way of building assets or having hard cold cash - paid their taxes to support those younger than them are now told "You're rich, you're lucky etc" we aren't going to give you the superannuation fund you have been promised all your life. Perhaps the Government should bring in work for the dole, abolish Artists benefits etc and put the money where it is needed.
28 September 2005
Superannuation should be available to everybody on precisely the same generous terms as the politicians give themselves - what's good for the geese would be great for the Kiwi.
21 July 2006
This would penalise those who were prudent with their money and saved and offer no incentive to save for the future
4 November 2008
Oh great... That means that the person who spends up large all his/her life gets a handout and the people that go without so they can exist in their retirement get nothing. Not acceptable.
28 February 2015
Reasons To Agree
The reasons given for disagreeing are valid. but we CAN'T AFFORD IT! Having said that, we should be generous in the means testing. Disclosure: I'm a New Zealand superannuitant with a house and an armed forces pension.
10 October 2010
Reasons for Remain NeutralNo reasons have yet been given to remain neutral.
You can make your comments once you have voted.