- - - - - - - - - - - - -

Friday, October 28, 2011

Labour's raising of retirement age racist, anti-worker and intergenerational theft

Labour need to appeal to middle class baby boomer's within a month or they are toast. They've done the math, if Dunne goes, if ACT goes and MANA splits Maori Party vote enough for Labour to come through the middle reducing the Maori Party to 2 seats, then National's sleep walk to victory stumbles by having no coalition partner.

For this one shot at the Death Star to work however, Labour need to appeal to all those middle class baby boomer's who voted for Labour in 2005 and feel guilty about voting for John Key in 2008.

Labour have offered the poor $5000 tax free and gst off fruit and veges, they now need to woo middle class baby boomers with property portfolios who know the economic system is structurally damaged and feel guilty about these facts and will respond to a firm paddling of our lazy no savings bums by raising the retirement age the way they fervently respond to their new found crash diets and fitness regimes after celebrating their 55th birthday.

Strategically brilliant but sadly politically corrupt.

I applaud Labour for recognizing our savings problems and are prepared to do something about it, but raising the age of retirement is racist, anti-worker and amounts to little more than another intergenerational theft by baby boomers against Gen Xers.

The life expectancy for a Pakeha male is 79, the life expectancy for a Maori male is 70, the poorest sector of NZ has to pay for a super plan that few of them will be alive to see? The injustice of raising the bar even further, to actually make an unjust situation even more unjust is outrageous, and the fact Maori well being hasn't even fluttered into the debate is just another example of the casual suburban racism of NZ.

Raising the retirement age is anti-worker, the 2010 Social Report points out the poorest suffer the same level of shorter life expectancy...

There is an association between life expectancy and the level of deprivation in the area where people live. In 2005–2007, males in the least deprived 10th of small areas in New Zealand could expect to live 8.8 years longer than males in the most deprived 10th of small areas (82.1 versus 73.3 years). For females, the difference was smaller, but still substantial, at 5.9 years (84.6 versus 78.7 years). These differences illustrate the links between socio-economic status and health.

...the working poor are the ones losing out here, and while Labour offer those worn out by work the opportunity to take retirement at 65, that body will inevitably be set up to turn down many claims as 'natural wear and tear' and not work related in the exact same way ACC misuses that definition.

The third way raising the retirement age is politically corrupt is in that it amounts to little more than another intergenerational theft by Baby Boomers against Gen Xers. Those bloody boomers have like a plague of bloated locusts taken their free education and tax payer funded privileges and property speculated debt ridden Gen Xers out of a first home and now they get to raise the retirement age allowing them to claw more of the career ladder stopping Gen Xers from advancing WHILE making Gen Xers work longer for privileges afforded those in a progressive democracy?

Who will rid me of these troublesome boomers?

Strategically brilliant, but politically corrupt and it'll probably give Labour their best shot at wooing guilty baby boomers over.



At 28/10/11 11:45 am, Blogger Gem said...

It's an interesting and tragic point about Maori life expectancy. That issue was also (briefly) highlighted on TVNZ 6:00 pm news last night. It would be good to probe the reasons Maori have worse social and health outcomes overall compared to other sectors of society. What would be even more fascinating would be for the Maori Party to tackle these sorts of tough questions, rather than being shifty and evasive and betraying their people. For a perfect example of Pita Sharples’ shiftiness and slippery demeanour, refer to the recent (Monday 24 October) Maori leaders’ debate on Native Affairs, Maori TV. It’s interesting that Tariana Turia didn’t front up. Perhaps she will in the next televised debate.

Or, maybe she’s like John Key – she prefers to take potshots at her opponents but won’t go head-to-head in televised debates for fear of exposing her political ignorance. For a prime example of this, consider the fact that Key described Labour’s pension age policy as a “cruel joke” http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10762041yet he refuses to front up and debate Goff about this policy. Key’s absence on Close Up last night was shameful. Yes, Goff has been notably absent from Labour’s election hoardings. I think Labour has made a big gaffe by sidelining Goff. However, Key supporters cannot latch onto Goff’s absence to excuse Key’s evasiveness. Key’s refusal to debate is anti-democratic, especially during an election campaign. Come on Key – man up and front up!

At 28/10/11 1:59 pm, Blogger macdoctor said...

How extraordinary that we actually agree on something, Bomber! The current meme that we all live longer and therefore can retire later is meaningless to a person in a job involving heavy manual labour. These jobs become physically impossible after 20 years or so and many folk who start out as labourers are unable to transition to a less physical occupation. They comprise the bulk of middle aged people on the sickness benefit. Extending retirement for these people is simply cruel and saves the country little money.

In addition, proponents of extending the retirement age point to us living longer while failing to realize that we are merely extending our failing health for longer with medicine. It does not neccesarily mean that we remain healthy enough to continue working.

At 29/10/11 11:14 am, Blogger Hans Versluys said...

Another reason why we need UBI instead of welfare/super, as outlined in the Big Kahuna.


Post a Comment

<< Home