Sent the following to Katy Gallagher, Jim Chalmers and my local MP.

Won't matter and won't make a difference, yet it made me feel better. Stacking Sats is more effective and efficient, though sometimes I feel a need to "rage against the machine". 😡🤣😂🧡

Here's the email message sent:

----start message----

I’m writing to express my concern about the aged pension asset test thresholds, which I believe unfairly disadvantage non-homeowners.

Currently, a couple who owns their home can have up to $481,500 in assets before their pension is affected, while a non-homeowner couple can have $739,500 which is a difference of $258,000. This implies that homeownership is being “valued” at $258,000 for the purposes of the pension test.

In reality, most homes in Australia, even modest ones, are worth far more than that. Yet this significant equity is completely exempt from assessment. Meanwhile, non-homeowners, who often face higher living costs due to rent and have no long-term housing security, are penalised if they’ve saved a similar amount in liquid assets.

This doesn’t seem equitable or reflective of the real cost of living for renters. In effect, the system rewards property wealth while punishing those who may have missed out on homeownership due to life circumstances beyond their control.

I’d appreciate your explanation on how this policy is justified and whether there are any plans to review this clear imbalance.

If I wanted to get this email to someone who could make a real difference with regards to this inequity, who would I be best to address?

Thank you for your time.

---end message----