Ryan Bridge: Cut Super 'welfare' for wealthy Baby Boomers
OPINION: There's been a lot of hate this week from all corners of politics over the looming superannuation cost explosion.
It's about to blow up and politicians have spent decades passing the hot potato issue around without doing anything about it.
Now Bill English has shown his hand, drawing the ire of everyone Generation X and younger who thinks the Baby Boomers are getting an easy ride.
But we can't blame Bill for the cost blowout.
We really should blame Hitler: without his rise to power in WWII, there would not have been a flurry of lovemaking after his defeat that created the Baby Boomers.
- NZ's generation battle - who's getting the roughest deal?
- Patrick Gower: Reckless Bill English starts generational war
- Letting Baby Boomers off Super age rise will cost $58 billion
- Baby Boomers - the most selfish generation ever?
I think it's unfair on some Baby Boomers, who have worked hard their whole lives with the expectation they'll receive Super at 65, to be told that won't happen because we didn't do our maths properly.
Some would literally be left out in the cold without Super.
They don't all own six rental properties, as headlines would have you believe.
But what we could do is asset-test Super so those with large property empires get nothing.
If they get into trouble they can sell some of their multiple homes, thereby boosting the housing stock.
Two birds, one stone.
Some might say this left-wing wealth bashing. It's the opposite.
I'm not suggesting we tax wealthy Baby Boomers.
But NZ Super is effectively welfare, so let's cut off welfare for those who don't actually need it.
Ryan Bridge is the host of Your Sunday on Radiolive. Tune in from 10am to 2pm this week for expert analysis and debate on what should be done about New Zealand's superannuation.