Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]


Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 8
One third of Australians over 60 living below poverty line: Global AgeWatch Index
Topic Started: 9 Sep 2015, 04:16 PM (5,187 Views)
peter fraser
Member Avatar


One third of Australians over 60 living below poverty line: Global AgeWatch Index
The World Today By Lucy Carter
Link


The Global AgeWatch Index has placed Australia at 17th in the world, behind New Zealand and Canada, and down four places from last year.

Experts believe that unless the Federal Government drastically changes some social welfare policies, the number of elderly Australians living in poverty will only increase.

The index, an annual snapshot of how the world's older citizens are faring, ranks 96 countries according to the social wellbeing of their over 60s.

Council on the Aging chief executive Ian Yates said Australia's rankings drop is a concern.

"We slipped a little bit on employment participation, which reflects the economic situation, and we actually haven't improved really in the areas of income security, health status or an age friendly environment," he said.

"We're still, in fact, 26 in the age friendly environment stakes, particularly because older people rate public transport as not very suitable for their needs generally in Australia, which is not a surprise to us."

Australia is ranked 62nd on income security, behind countries like Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan and Georgia, but Mr Yates said that ranking is not an entirely fair reflection.

"This is the one little glitch we have with this particular index — it measures pension coverage at 83 per cent in Australia.

"Of course the people who don't get the pension in Australia don't because they're well-off."

Mr Yates said the report is correct in pointing out that one-third of older Australians are living below the poverty line.

"On the Australian single pension, if you don't have any other income — and there are full pensioners who have little or no other income when they retire — they would fall below that poverty level.

"It also reflects the severe poverty of people who are 60-plus and unemployed and trying to live on Newstart, which is well under the poverty level and has quite draconian conditions attached to getting it."

Australia is ranked fifth in the world in terms of the health of older people.

"There are a lot of positives, aspects of care that are rated very well by this population in Australia," NSW Bureau of Health Information chief executive Dr Jean-Frederic Levesque said.

"For example, we can see that New South Wales has more favourable results than eight countries that were compared in the survey with regards to receiving a written plan about how to manage a chronic condition at home [and] being able to know who to contact if something is not going quite well with chronic condition."
Any expressed market opinion is my own and is not to be taken as financial advice
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
ThePauk
Member Avatar
Diamond Member
Not a measurement of wealth, as the PPOR is totally excluded from the agewatch index, just incomes.

http://www.helpage.org/global-agewatch/population-ageing-data/global-rankings-table/

17th.....mmmmm...

"For instance, the incidence of poverty of older persons is three times that of the total population in the Republic of Korea, more than two and a half times in Australia and more than twice in Slovenia, Switzerland and Denmark. This situation can be explained by the recent rapid growth in the incomes of their working-age populations, resulting in greater earnings inequality between the older population and the working-age population (Zaidi, 2010). "

Page 72 of http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/documents/ageing/Data/WorldPopulationAgeingReport2013.pdf

Anyway, I do note your point Peter and it only adds to the need to stop paying welfare to those who do not need it and increase it for those that do. Thanks...
Edited by ThePauk, 9 Sep 2015, 05:55 PM.
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Guest
Unregistered

I would hardly call an $18,000 a year pension living in poverty. It would only be living in poverty if you had to pay rent or didn't own your house outright.
"REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Will
Unregistered

Problem is, the poverty bar is set very high in Australia. I'm not sure what it is but when I've seen studies from various charity groups, it seems common to set the poverty level at something like 400 dollars a week. That's a heck of a lot more then a middle class African!

Really the full single aged pension, combined with rent assistance comes to nearly 500 a week.

Frankly that's not too bad, and realistically based on where the federal budget is at, we can't afford to increase that.
"REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
The Whole Truth
Member Avatar


Many older aussies were sucked into taking out home equity loans to gamble on the stock market last decade but those numbers are nothing compared to 1/3. My chiropractor is over 60 but he sure as hell isn't in the one third, the prick :lol
"Panics do not destroy capital; they merely reveal the extent to which it has been previously destroyed by its betrayal into hopelessly unproductive works." John Stuart Mill
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Will
Unregistered

I just found an article while browsing the net which explains everything perfectly.

link to housing article

A the end it says:

Quote:
 
Average Weekly Rental, South West Sydney, all housing types, June 2012: $350.00 per week. Affordable only to those earning in excess of $60,000.pa


So what we know is that no matter who you are, how frugal you are, whether you grow your own veges, you cannot possibly afford 350 dollars a week rent unless you earn at least 60K!!!!!

I can now absolutely conclude that if you get free rent, AND you earn 40k or less, YOU WILL DIE!!!!!

You have to because you will starve to death!!!!
"REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
ThePauk
Member Avatar
Diamond Member
The 1/3 is bullshit.
20% of people are self funded for a start.
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Ex BP Golly
Member Avatar


Bloody hell.

If we don't do something soon about this level of poverty, Frank won't be able to get a mortgage for another flooder.
Edited by Ex BP Golly, 10 Sep 2015, 08:29 AM.
WHAT WOULD EDDIE DO? MAAAATE!
Share a cot with Milton?
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
peter fraser
Member Avatar


Guest
9 Sep 2015, 10:57 PM
I would hardly call an $18,000 a year pension living in poverty. It would only be living in poverty if you had to pay rent or didn't own your house outright.
Actually a rat couldn't live and pay rent on $18,000 per annum.
Someone earning just $18K would certainly be living in poverty.
ThePauk
10 Sep 2015, 07:25 AM
The 1/3 is bullshit.
20% of people are self funded for a start.
Can't you read.
The article says over 60 - not aged pensioners.
Edited by peter fraser, 10 Sep 2015, 09:48 AM.
Any expressed market opinion is my own and is not to be taken as financial advice
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
ThePauk
Member Avatar
Diamond Member
peter fraser
10 Sep 2015, 09:46 AM
Actually a rat couldn't live and pay rent on $18,000 per annum.
Someone earning just $18K would certainly be living in poverty.

Can't you read.
The article says over 60 - not aged pensioners.
Can't you think?
If they are over 60 and working, then not in poverty.
20% of retirees are self funded, not in poverty

The article is wrong.

"Ian Yates from the Council on the Aging says that ranking isn't entirely a fair reflection.
IAN YATES: This is one little glitch we have with this particular index, the measures pension coverage at 83 per cent in Australia. Of course the people who don't get the pension in Australia don't because they're well-off.
LUCY CARTER: But Ian Yates says the report is correct in pointing out that one-third of older Australians are living below the poverty line.
IAN YATES: Of course on the Australian federal pension, if you don't have any other income, and there are full pensioners who have little or no other income when they retire, they would fall below that poverty level.
It also reflects the severe poverty of people who are 60-plus and unemployed and trying to live on Newstart, which is well under the poverty level and has quite draconian conditions attached to getting it."
http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2015/s4308985.htm

"Some of the major conclusions drawn from this paper are summarised below.
Before-housing measures of poverty need to be complemented with the appropriate after-housing measures. Before-housing measures tend to inflate the poverty rates of older cohorts, single-person households and widows and widowers. These groups do not have notably high poverty rates on the after-housing measure since a substantial proportion have little or no housing costs. Older cohorts and widowers tend to have low levels of subjective poverty and financial stress."
https://www.dss.gov.au/about-the-department/publications-articles/research-publications/social-policy-research-paper-series/number-29-income-poverty-subjective-poverty-and-financial-stress?HTML

"Age
The relationship between age and income poverty differed according to the measure used. On the before-housing measure, the two oldest cohorts (over 65 years) had the highest poverty rates, whereas these age cohorts were not so distinctive on the after-housing measure. The youngest age cohort (18 to 24 year-olds) had relatively high levels of income poverty on both measures, and 25 to 34 year-olds had the lowest rates of before-housing income poverty. Multivariate analyses showed that age was positively related to before-housing income poverty but negatively related to after-housing income poverty. This reflects the generally lower housing costs of older Australians. These findings indicate that using both before and after-housing measures provide a more comprehensive account of the relationship between age and income poverty."
Edited by ThePauk, 10 Sep 2015, 10:16 AM.
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums. Reliable service with over 8 years of experience.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Australian Property Forum · Next Topic »
Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 8



Australian Property Forum is an economics and finance forum dedicated to discussion of Australian and global real estate markets and macroeconomics, including house prices, housing affordability, and the likelihood of a property crash. Is there an Australian housing bubble? Will house prices crash, boom or stagnate? Is the Australian property market a pyramid scheme or Ponzi scheme? Can house prices really rise forever? These are the questions we address on Australian Property Forum, the premier real estate site for property bears, bulls, investors, and speculators. Members may also discuss matters related to finance, modern monetary theory (MMT), debt deflation, cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin Ethereum and Ripple, property investing, landlords, tenants, debt consolidation, reverse home equity loans, the housing shortage, negative gearing, capital gains tax, land tax and macro prudential regulation.

Forum Rules: The main forum may be used to discuss property, politics, economics and finance, precious metals, crypto currency, debt management, generational divides, climate change, sustainability, alternative energy, environmental topics, human rights or social justice issues, and other topics on a case by case basis. Topics unsuitable for the main forum may be discussed in the lounge. You agree you won't use this forum to post material that is illegal, private, defamatory, pornographic, excessively abusive or profane, threatening, or invasive of another forum member's privacy. Don't post NSFW content. Racist or ethnic slurs and homophobic comments aren't tolerated. Accusing forum members of serious crimes is not permitted. Accusations, attacks, abuse or threats, litigious or otherwise, directed against the forum or forum administrators aren't tolerated and will result in immediate suspension of your account for a number of days depending on the severity of the attack. No spamming or advertising in the main forum. Spamming includes repeating the same message over and over again within a short period of time. Don't post ALL CAPS thread titles. The Advertising and Promotion Subforum may be used to promote your Australian property related business or service. Active members of the forum who contribute regularly to main forum discussions may also include a link to their product or service in their signature block. Members are limited to one actively posting account each. A secondary account may be used solely for the purpose of maintaining a blog as long as that account no longer posts in threads. Any member who believes another member has violated these rules may report the offending post using the report button.

Australian Property Forum complies with ASIC Regulatory Guide 162 regarding Internet Discussion Sites. Australian Property Forum is not a provider of financial advice. Australian Property Forum does not in any way endorse the views and opinions of its members, nor does it vouch for for the accuracy or authenticity of their posts. It is not permitted for any Australian Property Forum member to post in the role of a licensed financial advisor or to post as the representative of a financial advisor. It is not permitted for Australian Property Forum members to ask for or offer specific buy, sell or hold recommendations on particular stocks, as a response to a request of this nature may be considered the provision of financial advice.

Views expressed on this forum are not representative of the forum owners. The forum owners are not liable or responsible for comments posted. Information posted does not constitute financial or legal advice. The forum owners accept no liability for information posted, nor for consequences of actions taken on the basis of that information. By visiting or using this forum, members and guests agree to be bound by the Zetaboards Terms of Use.

This site may contain copyright material (i.e. attributed snippets from online news reports), the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such content is posted to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific, and social justice issues. This constitutes 'fair use' of such copyright material as provided for in section 107 of US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed for research and educational purposes only. If you wish to use this material for purposes that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Such material is credited to the true owner or licensee. We will remove from the forum any such material upon the request of the owners of the copyright of said material, as we claim no credit for such material.

For more information go to Limitations on Exclusive Rights: Fair Use

Privacy Policy: Australian Property Forum uses third party advertising companies to serve ads when you visit our site. These third party advertising companies may collect and use information about your visits to Australian Property Forum as well as other web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services of interest to you. If you would like more information about this practice and to know your choices about not having this information used by these companies, click here: Google Advertising Privacy FAQ

Australian Property Forum is hosted by Zetaboards. Please refer also to the Zetaboards Privacy Policy