A government pension is a fund into which a sum of money is added during the period in which a person is employed by the government. When the government employee retires they are able to receive periodic payments from the fund in order to support themselves. As the birth rate continues to fall and the life expectancy rises governments worldwide are predicting funding shortfalls for pensioners. Of the 500,000 people receiving pensions in 2015 47% of the wealthier recipients received reduced pensions and 18% lost access to all of their pension payments. 34% of lower income pensioners received an increase in their pension of $30 a fortnight. The pensioners who lost their payments were deemed to have at least $823,000 in assets (this did not include the value of a home).
31% Yes |
69% No |
14% Yes |
64% No |
10% Yes, but only for low-income pensioners |
3% No, they should be reduced |
6% Yes, for government workers but not for politicians |
2% No, not until we decrease our national debt |
1% Yes, adjust them yearly for cost of living |
See how support for each position on “Government Pensions” has changed over time for 32.6k Australia voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
See how importance of “Government Pensions” has changed over time for 32.6k Australia voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Unique answers from Australia users whose views extended beyond the provided choices.
@9C5TRZG11mos11MO
They should be the same as any other person on a pension
@98T6TZ21yr1Y
No, abolish the pension
@9467QSC2yrs2Y
Should be increased for every retired person, non limited to Government workers.
@933YNCJ2yrs2Y
No, the should get the same pension as all retired Australians
@92ZDPT62yrs2Y
they should be in par Australia wide
@8Y3CS9M2yrs2Y
No, they should be increased for all Pensioners.
Explore other topics that are important to Australia voters.
@ISIDEWITH1yr1Y
Countries that have mandatory retirements for politicians include Argentina (age 75), Brazil (75 for judges and prosecutors), Mexico (70 for judges and prosecutors) and Singapore (75 for members of parliament.)
@ISIDEWITH6mos6MO
Proponents argue that this strategy would bolster national security by minimizing the risk of potential terrorists entering the country. Enhanced screening processes, once implemented, would provide a more thorough assessment of applicants, reducing the likelihood of malicious actors gaining entry.…
