Dear Editor
New Zealand features prominently in a report that contains the latest UN figures on Global Aging.
And it reminds me of our need to implement a Retirement Benefit that is fiscally durable but also equitable, in the face of our existing National Superannuation which is rapidly becoming fiscally unviable.
What is the particular need that is provided for with the Retirement Benefit? It’s a need that arises because citizens reach a certain elderly age and retire from the workforce. Thus they need a State-provided income upon which to survive. If they don’t retire from the workforce, why would they need a Retirement Benefit? Thus we immediately espy one flaw in the status quo.
If the Retirement Benefit is not fiscally viable in the near future, it is because the number of taxpayers vis-à-vis retirers has moved in an adverse direction. That is the sole reason why the Retirement Benefit is seen as becoming unviable.
Why has that ratio moved so adversely? Well, that’s because the baby boomers, the demographic moving into retirement, have failed to reproduce adequately. So, who’s to blame for the dilemma now being faced by retiring baby boomers? The baby boomers.
But not all of that baby boomer generation have failed in that regard. And it’s only the feminist mindset that promotes contraception and opposes large families that demands that all baby boomers must be penalised. All must wait longer to receive the Retirement Benefit.
Well, that’s just not equitable, and just not on. Ignoring for the moment other considerations, those baby boomers who have done their bit, who have produced adequate taxpayers, should not suffer for the selfishness of others.
So, the Retirement Benefit is not viable; the cost is rising too high. Then let’s raise the eligibility age to 70y, to reduce the number receiving the Benefit, to reduce the cost. But let’s allow one year’s reduction of that eligibility age for every taxpayer the retirer has produced. So a retiree who has produced five taxpayers would be eligible for the Retirement Benefit at 65y.
Too hard, cry the covert feminists. Not so. Very simple to include in our Tax Return forms a box wherein the taxpayers are asked to specify the mother and father who raised them, for the purpose of considering their Retirement Benefit eligibility. Every taxpayer will be happy to provide that information. Easy peasy for the IRD and WINZ to share those data, and immediately calculate eligibility for the Retirement Benefit.
Such an adjustment to the provision of the Retirement Benefit would have also the advantage of providing an incentive for today’s younger couples to have more children and, thus, supply the taxes for their own Retirement Benefit. That would also serve to diminish the need to “import” young immigrant workers. But that’s the last step.
Before that, there is the issue of this being a Retirement Benefit. As the Unemployment Benefit (Job Seeker’s Allowance) is payable to only those who are not employed, so it is that any Retirement Benefit should not be paid to those who are not retired. If you have income from wages, salary or self-employment, you just don’t get the Retirement Benefit.
That’s the first step. And it has the obvious added benefit of encouraging older workers to retire, and thus make jobs available to younger jobseekers, perhaps those needing to provide for a family.
Hmm.
T&L
Send your letters to the Editor to sb at thebfd.co.nz
Please put Letter to the Editor in the subject line.
