If this is what passes for intelligent discussion – i’m going back to kindergarten…

Share

If you are bored enough of your day-to-day, you may have noticed my previous posting which included the text of a note that i sent to the Crikey online newsletter in an attempt to get some sort of intelligent discussion happening in regards to commissions and fees for superannuation.

Well, it seems that when you have one version of the world it is best to edit out any meaningful dialogue that may contradict your views. Here is the text that was actually published in the “Comments” section.

oops. Didn’t copy. Will fix that shortly…

In effect, the Editor has chosen to completely remove all of my argument, leaving only a statement that makes it appear that i am so close to the issue (or so stupid) that i can’t see that members of super funds would OBVIOUSLY be better off if less money was coming out of their super accounts. It is an interesting take on what i was attempting to do. As a by-the-by, the same issue (Friday June 26th 2009, Article 11) includes a note from correspondent Richard Farmer, which confirms some of the details of the new system to be implemented in the UK. It pretty much reflects the bulk of what i have proposed for the super funds in Australia.

I very much enjoy my Crikey subscription but can’t help but feel that the suggested Editorial independence and free- thinking may only apply to certain areas. Maybe they thought i was a climate change “denialist?”.

For those who would like a different view on the “Industry Fund” fees issue, there is an excellent overview on the Chant West website.

Just for interest, my own take on the entire 9% employer super payment is that there should be a single Australia-wide default fund (most efficiently it would be the Future Fund), which offers a guaranteed capital and a reserved crediting rate. It should be fully linked to the ATO and whichever other sites to ensure that small account balances are amalgamated immediately and as efficiently as possible. With close to a global population coverage there should be a possibility of offering wholesale guaranteed insurability. Now THAT would be a great fund for Australia.

ANY change out of that fund should address the issue of costs / returns / options from the individual’s point of view.

But it won’t happen. There are too many vested interests already in play.

Share

  1 comment for “If this is what passes for intelligent discussion – i’m going back to kindergarten…

  1. Michael O'Hara
    July 16, 2009 at 5:33 am

    I am very pleased to report that Crikey have come back to me and confirmed that the editing was inappropriate, and was an issue of temporary personnel taking greater liberties than the editorial standard allowed.

Leave a Reply