What it means is the govt re-introducing the dreaded death...

What it means is the govt re-introducing the dreaded death duties which were abolished due to uproar long ago. The govt refuses to debate or consider negative gearing so why should the aged and their dependents accept such a proposal. The reality is it would be political suicide to attempt it and they wont do it. So really not much point to the debate.

Perhaps if the govt became serious by adopting a proper pension scheme for all those working which will provide a pension based on the accumulated units as applies to schemes in Italy and the UK. Superannuation could be modified to ensure such money goes into guaranteed fund with indexed earnings based on some formula. Also no lump sum withdrawals to be allowed and a pension to be paid based on the accumulated pension units. IMO this would also cause an uproar and therefore just a waste of time.

Maybe its just better to lift the mandatory super rate to say 15% in order that the next generation wont need access to an age pension. Those who cannot work or are unemployed for long periods and cannot accumulate much super would still have access to the basic pension but the pension liability would be hugely diminished. IMO this is a better option than forcing the aged to obtain loans on their home and the threshold value of the home to be set at a low $450,000. IMO its a crazy unfair system as it penalises thrift, those that scrimped and saved to buy their home and paid mortgages for say 30 years with all the associated interest and all of a sudden some thieving govt wants you to draw on the value to live or to apply a death duty to it. Whereas those that spent their money and opted to pay a lesser rent would receive both a full age pension and rent assistance to boot.

Next these cretins will want us to sell our organs to survive. Always thinking of ways to get more from the average person. Just let them try!