CSL is ‘undervalued' despite pharma tariff threat: Morningstar
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Advertiser
10 hours ago
- The Advertiser
Can pensioners really be 'wealthy'? One economist reckons they are
The attacks on Baby Boomers, labelling them as "wealthy" to the detriment of "families and young people" just because their home has increased in value, needs to stop. Brendan Coates, an economist with the Grattan Institute, was given a soap box on July 24 to air concerns "wealthy pensioners" should be penalised to benefit the rest of Australian society. Perhaps Brendan forgets people over the age of 65 are also valued members of society, and if they're eligible for the age pension (the current base payment being $27,333 a year for singles and $41,210 for couples, before tax is taken out) it's because they are just scraping by. Compulsory super only began in 1992 at 3 per cent, whereas Brendan enjoys 12 per cent as of July 1. The age pension is below minimum wage, and far below the wage of an economist (in excess of $100,000 according to "[Retirees] can be in Potts Point or Toorak with a $5m house and receive the same pension that a person in a $500,000 unit in Bendigo or Bathurst is receiving," he is quoted as saying in the Australian Financial Review. "People with substantial wealth are receiving the pension who arguably don't need it." Read more from The Senior: Mr Coates believes a retiree's family home (regardless if they bought it 40 years ago for next to nothing, then for the pandemic to jack up the land value) should be included in the pension assets test to better help "those who need it". But Brendan isn't a fan of retirees with superannuation either. A Grattan Institute report by Brendan Coates, released a day after his quotes around "wealthy pensioners", ironically called for more tax on superannuation funds. Not sure about you Brendan, but my grandparents on the Gold Coast have lived far longer than they expected and are now living day to day, as their meagre super dwindled to nothing. Pensioners and self-funded retirees are being slammed every which way as the "cash cows" of society, that should be pushed out of their homes - "and downsize" - to make way for a seemingly more important demographic: anyone under the age of 50. In 2025, around 58 per cent of Australians aged over 65 (around 2.4 million people) receive either the full or part age pension. But why would someone not have enough super to retire on comfortably? Compulsory super only came into play 30 years ago (around 10 years after Brendan Coates was born). "While Australians have reason to feel proud of the success of Australia's superannuation system ... the need for review, refinement and reform continues. An example is the retirement savings of Australian women," the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority states on their website. Older women are the fastest-growing group of homeless people in Australia. The 2021 Census reported a 6.6 per cent increase to women over 55 experiencing homelessness. Divorce and lack of super (due to raising children) are a big factor. Banks also won't give older people a loan for a home and rents have skyrocketed. The Superannuation Guarantee, with a mandatory three per cent contribution rate for employers came into effect in 1992 - nearly 20 years after reader of The Senior Suzanne G finished high school. "As a woman of 67 soon 68 ... back in 1974 when I finished school there was no superannuation," the retired pensioner told The Senior. She said she's worked all her life, owns her own home, and had a "meagre private super" which was cashed in some years ago to complete home renovations. The 1980s was the birth of superannuation for Aussies, but in the beginning, it was generally limited to public servants and white collar employees of large corporations. It was only in 2003 that provisions came in to allow the splitting of superannuation between divorcing or separating spouses, while 2007 saw investment losses for Australian superannuation funds of more than $200 billion thanks to the global financial crisis (GFC). The other flipside to all this: is if an older person does want to keep working they are either financially penalised (if they're on the age pension) or they're discriminated against by employers (according to the research by the Human Rights Commission and Australian Human Resources Institute). Who's with me and standing up for the rights of our wise elders? Retirees are humans too, with basic needs like anyone else. It's time the generations before them showed some respect. Share your comments below if you agree ... or disagree ... The attacks on Baby Boomers, labelling them as "wealthy" to the detriment of "families and young people" just because their home has increased in value, needs to stop. Brendan Coates, an economist with the Grattan Institute, was given a soap box on July 24 to air concerns "wealthy pensioners" should be penalised to benefit the rest of Australian society. Perhaps Brendan forgets people over the age of 65 are also valued members of society, and if they're eligible for the age pension (the current base payment being $27,333 a year for singles and $41,210 for couples, before tax is taken out) it's because they are just scraping by. Compulsory super only began in 1992 at 3 per cent, whereas Brendan enjoys 12 per cent as of July 1. The age pension is below minimum wage, and far below the wage of an economist (in excess of $100,000 according to "[Retirees] can be in Potts Point or Toorak with a $5m house and receive the same pension that a person in a $500,000 unit in Bendigo or Bathurst is receiving," he is quoted as saying in the Australian Financial Review. "People with substantial wealth are receiving the pension who arguably don't need it." Read more from The Senior: Mr Coates believes a retiree's family home (regardless if they bought it 40 years ago for next to nothing, then for the pandemic to jack up the land value) should be included in the pension assets test to better help "those who need it". But Brendan isn't a fan of retirees with superannuation either. A Grattan Institute report by Brendan Coates, released a day after his quotes around "wealthy pensioners", ironically called for more tax on superannuation funds. Not sure about you Brendan, but my grandparents on the Gold Coast have lived far longer than they expected and are now living day to day, as their meagre super dwindled to nothing. Pensioners and self-funded retirees are being slammed every which way as the "cash cows" of society, that should be pushed out of their homes - "and downsize" - to make way for a seemingly more important demographic: anyone under the age of 50. In 2025, around 58 per cent of Australians aged over 65 (around 2.4 million people) receive either the full or part age pension. But why would someone not have enough super to retire on comfortably? Compulsory super only came into play 30 years ago (around 10 years after Brendan Coates was born). "While Australians have reason to feel proud of the success of Australia's superannuation system ... the need for review, refinement and reform continues. An example is the retirement savings of Australian women," the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority states on their website. Older women are the fastest-growing group of homeless people in Australia. The 2021 Census reported a 6.6 per cent increase to women over 55 experiencing homelessness. Divorce and lack of super (due to raising children) are a big factor. Banks also won't give older people a loan for a home and rents have skyrocketed. The Superannuation Guarantee, with a mandatory three per cent contribution rate for employers came into effect in 1992 - nearly 20 years after reader of The Senior Suzanne G finished high school. "As a woman of 67 soon 68 ... back in 1974 when I finished school there was no superannuation," the retired pensioner told The Senior. She said she's worked all her life, owns her own home, and had a "meagre private super" which was cashed in some years ago to complete home renovations. The 1980s was the birth of superannuation for Aussies, but in the beginning, it was generally limited to public servants and white collar employees of large corporations. It was only in 2003 that provisions came in to allow the splitting of superannuation between divorcing or separating spouses, while 2007 saw investment losses for Australian superannuation funds of more than $200 billion thanks to the global financial crisis (GFC). The other flipside to all this: is if an older person does want to keep working they are either financially penalised (if they're on the age pension) or they're discriminated against by employers (according to the research by the Human Rights Commission and Australian Human Resources Institute). Who's with me and standing up for the rights of our wise elders? Retirees are humans too, with basic needs like anyone else. It's time the generations before them showed some respect. Share your comments below if you agree ... or disagree ... The attacks on Baby Boomers, labelling them as "wealthy" to the detriment of "families and young people" just because their home has increased in value, needs to stop. Brendan Coates, an economist with the Grattan Institute, was given a soap box on July 24 to air concerns "wealthy pensioners" should be penalised to benefit the rest of Australian society. Perhaps Brendan forgets people over the age of 65 are also valued members of society, and if they're eligible for the age pension (the current base payment being $27,333 a year for singles and $41,210 for couples, before tax is taken out) it's because they are just scraping by. Compulsory super only began in 1992 at 3 per cent, whereas Brendan enjoys 12 per cent as of July 1. The age pension is below minimum wage, and far below the wage of an economist (in excess of $100,000 according to "[Retirees] can be in Potts Point or Toorak with a $5m house and receive the same pension that a person in a $500,000 unit in Bendigo or Bathurst is receiving," he is quoted as saying in the Australian Financial Review. "People with substantial wealth are receiving the pension who arguably don't need it." Read more from The Senior: Mr Coates believes a retiree's family home (regardless if they bought it 40 years ago for next to nothing, then for the pandemic to jack up the land value) should be included in the pension assets test to better help "those who need it". But Brendan isn't a fan of retirees with superannuation either. A Grattan Institute report by Brendan Coates, released a day after his quotes around "wealthy pensioners", ironically called for more tax on superannuation funds. Not sure about you Brendan, but my grandparents on the Gold Coast have lived far longer than they expected and are now living day to day, as their meagre super dwindled to nothing. Pensioners and self-funded retirees are being slammed every which way as the "cash cows" of society, that should be pushed out of their homes - "and downsize" - to make way for a seemingly more important demographic: anyone under the age of 50. In 2025, around 58 per cent of Australians aged over 65 (around 2.4 million people) receive either the full or part age pension. But why would someone not have enough super to retire on comfortably? Compulsory super only came into play 30 years ago (around 10 years after Brendan Coates was born). "While Australians have reason to feel proud of the success of Australia's superannuation system ... the need for review, refinement and reform continues. An example is the retirement savings of Australian women," the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority states on their website. Older women are the fastest-growing group of homeless people in Australia. The 2021 Census reported a 6.6 per cent increase to women over 55 experiencing homelessness. Divorce and lack of super (due to raising children) are a big factor. Banks also won't give older people a loan for a home and rents have skyrocketed. The Superannuation Guarantee, with a mandatory three per cent contribution rate for employers came into effect in 1992 - nearly 20 years after reader of The Senior Suzanne G finished high school. "As a woman of 67 soon 68 ... back in 1974 when I finished school there was no superannuation," the retired pensioner told The Senior. She said she's worked all her life, owns her own home, and had a "meagre private super" which was cashed in some years ago to complete home renovations. The 1980s was the birth of superannuation for Aussies, but in the beginning, it was generally limited to public servants and white collar employees of large corporations. It was only in 2003 that provisions came in to allow the splitting of superannuation between divorcing or separating spouses, while 2007 saw investment losses for Australian superannuation funds of more than $200 billion thanks to the global financial crisis (GFC). The other flipside to all this: is if an older person does want to keep working they are either financially penalised (if they're on the age pension) or they're discriminated against by employers (according to the research by the Human Rights Commission and Australian Human Resources Institute). Who's with me and standing up for the rights of our wise elders? Retirees are humans too, with basic needs like anyone else. It's time the generations before them showed some respect. Share your comments below if you agree ... or disagree ... The attacks on Baby Boomers, labelling them as "wealthy" to the detriment of "families and young people" just because their home has increased in value, needs to stop. Brendan Coates, an economist with the Grattan Institute, was given a soap box on July 24 to air concerns "wealthy pensioners" should be penalised to benefit the rest of Australian society. Perhaps Brendan forgets people over the age of 65 are also valued members of society, and if they're eligible for the age pension (the current base payment being $27,333 a year for singles and $41,210 for couples, before tax is taken out) it's because they are just scraping by. Compulsory super only began in 1992 at 3 per cent, whereas Brendan enjoys 12 per cent as of July 1. The age pension is below minimum wage, and far below the wage of an economist (in excess of $100,000 according to "[Retirees] can be in Potts Point or Toorak with a $5m house and receive the same pension that a person in a $500,000 unit in Bendigo or Bathurst is receiving," he is quoted as saying in the Australian Financial Review. "People with substantial wealth are receiving the pension who arguably don't need it." Read more from The Senior: Mr Coates believes a retiree's family home (regardless if they bought it 40 years ago for next to nothing, then for the pandemic to jack up the land value) should be included in the pension assets test to better help "those who need it". But Brendan isn't a fan of retirees with superannuation either. A Grattan Institute report by Brendan Coates, released a day after his quotes around "wealthy pensioners", ironically called for more tax on superannuation funds. Not sure about you Brendan, but my grandparents on the Gold Coast have lived far longer than they expected and are now living day to day, as their meagre super dwindled to nothing. Pensioners and self-funded retirees are being slammed every which way as the "cash cows" of society, that should be pushed out of their homes - "and downsize" - to make way for a seemingly more important demographic: anyone under the age of 50. In 2025, around 58 per cent of Australians aged over 65 (around 2.4 million people) receive either the full or part age pension. But why would someone not have enough super to retire on comfortably? Compulsory super only came into play 30 years ago (around 10 years after Brendan Coates was born). "While Australians have reason to feel proud of the success of Australia's superannuation system ... the need for review, refinement and reform continues. An example is the retirement savings of Australian women," the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority states on their website. Older women are the fastest-growing group of homeless people in Australia. The 2021 Census reported a 6.6 per cent increase to women over 55 experiencing homelessness. Divorce and lack of super (due to raising children) are a big factor. Banks also won't give older people a loan for a home and rents have skyrocketed. The Superannuation Guarantee, with a mandatory three per cent contribution rate for employers came into effect in 1992 - nearly 20 years after reader of The Senior Suzanne G finished high school. "As a woman of 67 soon 68 ... back in 1974 when I finished school there was no superannuation," the retired pensioner told The Senior. She said she's worked all her life, owns her own home, and had a "meagre private super" which was cashed in some years ago to complete home renovations. The 1980s was the birth of superannuation for Aussies, but in the beginning, it was generally limited to public servants and white collar employees of large corporations. It was only in 2003 that provisions came in to allow the splitting of superannuation between divorcing or separating spouses, while 2007 saw investment losses for Australian superannuation funds of more than $200 billion thanks to the global financial crisis (GFC). The other flipside to all this: is if an older person does want to keep working they are either financially penalised (if they're on the age pension) or they're discriminated against by employers (according to the research by the Human Rights Commission and Australian Human Resources Institute). Who's with me and standing up for the rights of our wise elders? Retirees are humans too, with basic needs like anyone else. It's time the generations before them showed some respect. Share your comments below if you agree ... or disagree ...
7NEWS
16 hours ago
- 7NEWS
Terrace jackpot! This home quadrupled in price in over a decade
A grand Victorian terrace in Potts Point has changed hands and more than quadrupled its price since it last sold for just $2.45 million in 2012. The landmark five-storey property at 157 Victoria Street, was once a dilapidated boarding house, but has since been transformed into one of the most impressive private homes in inner Sydney. Sold this month through Bresic Whitney, the sale highlights the extraordinary capital growth seen in tightly held areas of the eastern suburbs over the past decade. With over 360 square metres of internal space, a 6-metre-plus frontage, and rare uninterrupted views of Sydney's city skyline, Harbour Bridge and Opera House, the property represents a rare convergence of scale, location and prestige. records show it last sold for $2,450,000 in 2012, before the current boom in demand for high-end, inner-city living hit its stride. Located at the top of Victoria Street, an enclave locals refer to as the "Parisian end" for its leafy streetscape and village-like charm, the home sits among some of Sydney's most desirable addresses. A canopy of London Plane trees, historic architecture, and proximity to celebrated dining spots like Ms G's and The Butler create a European-style ambience in the heart of the city. property expert and CEO of Cohen Handler Buyer's Advocates, Simon Cohen, said: "It's an absolute beauty! "My favourite part of the house is the wine cellar stocked with some great reds, and the kitchen which is modern and sleek and offsets the style of this Victorian terrace and brings it into the modern world." The residence has been completely reimagined with a focus on luxury and light. Multiple outdoor entertaining areas with views over Cowper Bay to the CBD, elegant interiors, and thoughtful restoration details blend 19th-century character with contemporary design. Perhaps the property's most impressive feature is its exclusive outlook. It backs directly onto Embarkation Park, one of the city's hidden green spaces perched above Woolloomooloo Wharf. With panoramic views extending across to harbour icons, the terrace offers a front-row seat to New Year's Eve fireworks and access to a peaceful park sanctuary year-round. Cohen agrees: "The best part of the house is this epic terrace with the quintessential Sydney view." Access to the city is just as spectacular. The Butler and McElhone heritage staircases are cut into the cliff, providing locals with a sneaky shortcut to the Domain, galleries, and harbourside paths and an excellent workout with a view. In a suburb dominated by compact apartments and smaller terraces, homes of this scale are almost never available. Agent Chris Breedon of Bresic Whitney East, who handled the sale, said of the property: "It's rare to find a property of this size and quality in Potts Point." Breedon also revealed that the sale was the result of a longstanding relationship with the buyers, which ultimately made the deal possible. "The buyers were previous clients of mine," he said. "Back in January they mentioned they were looking to upsize locally, and asked me to keep them in mind if the right place came up. If it did, they wanted to be among the first to know." That opportunity came in March when the home was due to launch to market. Breedon immediately notified a shortlist of interested parties, including the eventual buyers, though they were overseas at the time. "I wanted to show them straight away, but the timing didn't work," he said. "The home went to market but didn't find the perfect buyer. The owners were happy to be patient until it felt that way, so we paused the campaign." The property remained on Bresic Whitney's private sales portal, which showcases exclusive listings not available elsewhere, keeping it visible to qualified buyers throughout the agency's network. When the buyers returned from Europe over winter, the conversation picked up where it left off. "They specifically asked if they could see the home and over about a fortnight they visited it several times," Breedon said. "They weren't active buyers in the traditional sense, but they'd remembered the home. And now, the timing was right." With very few properties offering this combination of heritage, luxury, and views, it's little wonder one buyer was willing to pay a premium, and the vendor walked away with a multimillion-dollar windfall.
ABC News
a day ago
- ABC News
Farmers face fines for blocking access during transmission line projects under plan
Farmers are vowing to stop transmission line builders from using their land, despite the threat of large fines and clashes with police. The Victorian government plans to change legislation around land access for transmission project construction, which would introduce new penalties and give authorities the ability to use force if needed. The proposed amendments to the National Electricity Bill are expected to be debated in state parliament this week. The law change would facilitate the design and construction of new transmission projects like VNI West and the Western Renewables Link (WRL), which are key parts of the government's renewable energy transition. The projects have faced huge opposition from landowners and sparked numerous protests. Claire Grant farms with her partner Tim at Glenloth East, between Kerang and St Arnaud. VNI West, a high-voltage transmission line planned to run from New South Wales to Bulgana, would cut directly through their farm. Compensation is on offer for landowners who have towers and infrastructure built on their property, but Ms Grant said no amount of money would buy their support. "[The government] just doesn't understand that money can't win us over," Ms Grant said. Under the new legislation, Ms Grant could be fined $12,000 for refusing access to builders. Authorised workers would also be able to use reasonable force to get onto her property, with the backing of police. But Ms Grant said none of that mattered to her. "We don't want them on our land. We will have our tractors [at the front gate]. We will have our dozer there. We will have whatever we need to block them from entering our land," she said. Beck Legal property and development director Josh Ennis said there would be very few circumstances where an access order would not be granted by a court, under the legislation change. "You would be looking at safety concerns or biosecurity concerns," Mr Ennis said. Mr Ennis advises farmers about the legal implications of the VNI West project, and said authorities already had access rights for surveys, but there were no enforcement provisions in the existing laws. "The bill before parliament takes it a step further in that it introduces the concept of authorised officers," he said. "Those officers have the ability to issue on-the-spot fines if people obstruct them, and they also have the power to get an order from a Magistrates' Court. "Once they have that, they've got the right to use reasonable force and attend with Victoria Police." Ms Grant said she was opposed to VNI West for a long list of reasons, including a potential loss of land value, restricted use of machinery, fire risk and aerial spraying limitations. The couple recently built a new house that would look out on the transmission line. "We're going to have a lovely view of VNI West out our window," Ms Grant said. "We probably wouldn't have built the house if we knew this would happen. The Victorian opposition has repeatedly said it would seek to repeal the legislation if it wins the next election in 2026. The coalition's energy spokesperson David Davis described it as "sharp, harsh legislation" and "significant government overreach". "The government should not have brought in this bill that has a very authoritarian tone to it and a dramatic escalation in penalties and control," he said. "The government already has very significant powers to build infrastructure." VicGrid chief executive Alistair Parker told the Victorian Country Hour that voluntary access agreements were his top priority. "Our position is that we should be seeking voluntary access from people, we should be negotiating with them, we should be understanding their biosecurity concerns, we should be honouring those," he said. "Our really strong message to transmission companies is 'get voluntary agreements'. VicGrid is responsible for planning and developing the new infrastructure and Mr Parker said he believed voluntary access would be secured with all but "one or two people" in the path of VNI West. VNI West developer Transmission Company Victoria (TCV) declined to be interviewed, but in a statement, a spokesperson said it was "committed to voluntary agreements" and "working with landholders". Energy Minister Lily D'Ambrosio was also contacted for comment but was unavailable for an interview.
