Population ageing only half the story

Lets cut to the chase. Have you got $600,000 saved in super? If you're 55, do you reckon you'll have that sort of money by the time you're 65 (without selling the house)? Of course you won't. Less than 10 per cent of Australians will (born 1945-1964).

Many of the post war generation have worked hard for 40 years to get what they've got. What sort of government first fails to plan for an ageing population, and then when it does cobble together some half-baked initiatives, it doesn't tell the Australian public?

If recruiters say you're told old to work even though you're a fit 55, or they say you're too young at 19, because you have no experience but plenty of motivation, then we're not far off sending coloured people to the back of the bus again.

The sting in the tail is that the people who are going to get stuck with the bill are those born now, the 2000's and the 1990s. This will build intergenerational tension.

The Government could do less but I don't see how that's possible. There are the Experience+ programs, which are a token gesture. There is the Corporate Champions program, which took two years to get off the ground and the $1000 Jobs Bonus, which hasn't worked. In fact, very few employers or citizens - beyond those that read the 'shock horror' stories of budget blow outs - know much about the demographic changes at all.

The aim is not to keep moving eligibility away but to ensure we poison the wells of age prejudice (recruiters in the main) so that older folk can stay in work and those over 50 who want work, can find it.