Talk:Superannuation in Australia

message: Are these really necessary?  I think it's noteworthy that the two funds mentioned are administered by the same company.  The description of industry funds appears to be more than adequate and I think the funds mentioned should be removed. Magictorch 11:26, 6 September 2007 (AEST)
:Agree, it is just advertising. Kewpid 04:11, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  References and links to specific industry funds

message: From Compulsory Superannuation in Australia
I think that the purpose of superannuation in Australia should be outlined more clearly
(User:actuarial disco boy) says - I think this would be a worthwhile refinement.  Trouble is - does the Government really know?  I'm not sure an overall purpose of retirement incomes policy has ever been coherently articulated. (is it to save government money? boost retirement incomes? make the budget more robust with an ageing population?)
Also what is the purpose of the age pension vis-a-vis the purpose of superannuation?
Tarich 10:18, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe the question was asked with a certain degree of cynicism. ;) Kewpid 10:53, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  This page has been moved

message: Should this artlice be renamed "Superannuation in Australia"?  not all superannuation is compulsory.  The page has grown to cover broader aspects of superannuation than just compulsion.Actuarial disco boy 12:26, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: title of article

message: Any comments? Actuarial disco boy 20:36, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Move. It probably would have made more sense to start the Superannuation article with the broader title in the first place. -- Kewpid 05:00, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested Move

message: Some of the changes mentioned are already included in the article. The others should be included within the existing headings in the article. Kewpid 16:18, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent changes to Superannuation 

message: The graph :Image:Aus_super_funds_asset_growth.png is out of proportion, exaggerating the negative performance. Newspaper do it all the time for sensationalism, but I don't think this is how it should be in an encyclopaedia.--Sir Anon (talk) 13:09, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Graph out of proportion 

message: The section makes no reference to DASP and WHM, it may be added as "exceptions" for the cases where you can access your super. Of course, this is a minor things, but it may be important for many non-Australians working there, who have no idea they can take those money back. LaurV (talk) 07:57, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Access to superannuation 

message: * http://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=superannuation+funds+in+Australia&num=10&btnG=Search+Scholar&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_occt=title&as_sauthors=&as_publication=&as_ylo=&as_yhi=&as_sdt=1.&as_sdtp=on&as_sdts=5&hl=en
--124.78.225.90 (talk) 08:16, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Red links maybe associated with the following.... 

message: * http://govsearch.australia.gov.au/search/search.cgi?collection=gov_all&coverage=all&num_ranks=3&extra_all_num_ranks=3&form=simple&searchTab=all&query=superannuation+benchmark
--222.67.210.82 (talk) 02:32, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Search results for the industry guidances..... 

message: Are there any stats on how much money people have in superannuation? That would be useful info.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.191.116.161 (talk) 03:31, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Amounts in super 

message: Why is there no criticms section about how Superannuation is a glorified Ponzi scheme?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.159.111.98 (talk) 08:01, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism? 

message: The article describes the situation for "Australians" again and again - lets me wonder what the legislation is for non-Australians who contribute to Superannuation. Any difference? No? Then we should change "Australians" into "people", "employees", "retiree".... Thanks Mme Mim (talk) 21:05, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Australians

message: I added a section that discusses the impact of super on pensions. It would be good if someone could check that I got it right.  Hard to find good info.  
What is really needed is a summary of the common case, namely Compulsory super, retire 67, take a super pension, what happens.  
(I have read up on this and I cannot figure it out.  The docs are scattered, full of obscure cases and terminology.  I doubt that any government bureaucrat that wrote them really understands the system, and certainly not outside whatever tiny bit they administer.)
Tuntable (talk) 23:30, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please review Pension section 

message: Substituted at 07:19, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment