If you haven’t taken a good look at the US government’s plan for social security, and you’re under 50, then you ought to. The White House website is a good place to start, but don’t get bogged down by the rhetoric before you get to read between the lines.

President Bush claims that he will listen to any good idea, save raising payroll taxes, to save the pension system. Well, if governments really want to look at what will happen to people when they’re old, I make a great case study of what to expect. First of all, I’m Australian, and we have been under the grip of Superannuation for almost as long as I have been working. However, back when Superannuation was introduced, the majority of workers could still work under relatively fair labour laws – that is, if you worked over a certain amount of hours a week, there were regulations which stipulated you had to be hired full-time, and all of the benefits that this ensured, such as sick days, holidays, and, something we know little of these days - job security.

But now, especially under John Howard’s draconian “Workplace Relations” laws, you can be hired for as many hours as an employer likes, under the conditions they like, and if you don’t like it, you can be sacked without question. There are ordinary workers now fighting in courts to stop the government imposing almost AU$30,000 worth of fines on workers who spoke out about their working conditions. For the average working family, to lose your job, and then have to pay lawyers to fight off fines of that magnitude is crippling. Now, this is very relevant to a retiring population in a few years to come. For a start, many people are forced into working for people as a contractor. This means you are not employed by anyone – you have to do as you’re told just the same, but you pay your own tax, super, insurance and other associated business costs. So what this means is that you are paying to work, you are paying to retire. When did that become fair?

To top it off, Superannuation is just a big bonanza for financial institutions. Imagine: a whole population putting away a minimum of 9 percent of their wages every week, which is then charged account-keeping fees. (The 9 percent is paid by the employer, on top of tax, so Super is also a very hefty burden for small business owners). The financial institutions invest the funds into stock, bonds, whatever they see fit (and could very well go bankrupt, and some have, taking off with people’s life savings). In my case, I couldn’t even tell you how much money I have in various accounts – each employer makes you join a different one, so it is easy to lose track of your money. One year I rounded it all up in the ‘dead super office’ of the Australian Taxation Office (ATO). I believe I was worth approximately $500. It’s not that this was the original amount. What little super I did have was whittled to nothing by the extortionate fees the financial institutions sucked out. Oh, and let’s not forget to mention: after all this, the government is still taxing me on my super. I suspect when I (and if) I return to Australia, there will be precious little left for me to retire on. It’ll be a case of “when she got there, the cupboard was bare…”

So, when I had a look at the White House’s statement on social security, I was intrigued. It read:

“The President has assured Americans that he will not change the Social Security system in any way for those born before 1950.”

So, for people born before 1950 (and, let’s face it, most people currently in congress making the rules), their pension will not be touched. For future generations, a system close to Superannuation is what they have in mind:

“As we fix Social Security, we must make it a better deal for our younger workers by allowing them to put part of their payroll taxes in personal retirement accounts.”

Allowing you. Well, gee, thanks. Isn’t that’s what’s supposed to happen to our taxes under government management? Why does it need to go into private corporations’ piggy banks first? Are the government just really bad at saving money? (Don’t answer that.) What’s more, does this mean that those who are able-bodied get a pension, but those who are in more unfortunate circumstances can just go fly off a cliff? The ideal behind taxes (not in their original, feudalistic form, but in a modern, supposedly egalitarian society) is to pool money so that essential services can be maintained. I don’t think ‘essential services’ means a blow out in the wire-tapping budget. I mean good education, good health care, aged care, pensions and public transport. These are just the basics, and these needs are not being met.

The government’s priorities are in need of a shake-up. There is no way, if the budget is run with the benefit of the people in mind, that social security should EVER bankrupt the system. A war in Iraq might bankrupt it, but a retiring generation shouldn’t. It’s not up to the people, who have been paying taxes all their lives, who are gradually having their education, health and infrastructure funding slashed, to then fork out for their own pension. It is not up to them to manage the funds that the government has been employed by the people to do. If there’s not enough money for your pension, ask, “why the hell not? Where’s my money going?” I’ll tell you where – it’s hoisting up the market. It’s being gambled.

The White House gives these estimates:

“In 1950, there were 16 workers to support every one beneficiary of Social Security. Today, there are only 3.3 workers supporting every Social Security beneficiary. In 2008 – just three short years from now – baby boomers will begin to retire. And over the next few decades, people will be living longer and benefits are scheduled to increase dramatically. By the time today’s youngest workers turn 65, there will only be 2 workers supporting each beneficiary. Under the current system, today’s 30-year-old worker will face a 27% benefit cut when he or she reaches normal retirement age.”

I give you warning, from a country that has lost its sheen and it’s history of fighting for worker’s rights, the country who was one of the first to give woman the vote, the so-called ‘lucky country’ – we’re not so lucky anymore. Once your government institutionalises a system that essentially pours money into the coffers of its corporate mates, you have no hope of ever getting your pension back. May we be thankful Vegemite has so much vitamin B, because it’s all we’ll be able to afford when we retire. Don’t make the mistake we made. Fight for what you’ve got, and demand that funds be re-routed into government-managed social security, which is responsibly managed to ensure all people can retire in peace. Whether it’s 40-odd working years of part-time or full-time labour, it’s all the same in the end. A lifetime.

If you need me, I’ll be in Sweden…