this post was submitted on 03 Jan 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)
Australian News
543 readers
41 users here now
A place to share and discuss news relating to Australia and Australians.
Rules
- Follow the aussie.zone rules
- Keep discussions civil and respectful
- Exclude profanity from post titles
- Exclude excessive profanity from comments
- Satire is allowed, however post titles must be prefixed with
[satire]
Recommended and Related Communities
Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:
- Australia
- World News (from an Australian Perspective)
- Australian Politics
- Aussie Environment
- Ask an Australian
- AusFinance
- Pictures
- AusLegal
- Aussie Frugal Living
- Cars (Australia)
- Coffee
- Chat
- Aussie Zone Meta
- bapcsalesaustralia
- Food Australia
Plus other communities for sport and major cities.
https://aussie.zone/communities
Banner: ABC
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
There's a few different things going on here but sadly, one of them is poor financial decisions on Elaine's part.
I'm not blaming her for that, lord knows I've made more than my share of poor decisions financial and otherwise, but while there are valid criticisms to be made of our superannuation system, Elaine's situation isn't really a useful prism through which to enumerate them.
One of the biggest problems is as always, privatisation. Some super funds are for profit, some are not for profit, and some are self managed. My point here is, because of the eyewatering amount of money in superannuation, and because it's not managed by the government exclusively, it has attracted an entire industry of bottom feeders leaching off the pool of money. That wouldn't necessarily be a problem in and of itself, but that industry spends a lot of time advocating for even more complex rules to ensure that it's not navigable by the lay-person.
Is there a law that money managed by a superfund can not take more in fees than its generating in returns? I feel that should be a thing.
That's not really possible.
In a year in which there's a share market "adjustment" returns will be negative. Super fund staff still need to get paid.
Rightly or wrongly, it's up to members to ensure that their fund's fees are reasonable.