Comments on Stephen King "Superannuation needs a sustainable framework", 6/04/2013, http://theconversation.com/superannuation-needs-a-sustainable-framework-13279
While the view and argument of Professor King may be regarded as "right" from a particular point of view or some particular economic theories, it is not necessarily right or correct.
King seems making no difference between one's own money/income with the money provided by other taxpayers.
Any conclusion based on such a view point is likely to be problematic when one take a different view.
The kind of view or thinking is too inducive to laziness and irreponsibility. The reflection in debates in Australia is that some people only talk about how much so called tax concessions that some higher income earners get or would get but not about how much they have paid or would pay tax.
This kind of thinking in terms of per capita entitlement of equal concessions is an extreme view, just as the other possible extreme that per capita tax liability, that is, each person pays the same amount of tax.
Just imagine that latter scenario and how extreme it is, one would understand how extreme and absurd the former is too!
PS: While it is commendable for the Treasurer Swan and the Superannuation Minister Shorten to announce the idea of establishing a semi independent superannuation guardian to consider future government policy on superannuation, it would have been better and more convincing should that had been equally applied to the announced measures, that is, no changes until such a body is set and has scrutinised those changes and got bipartisan support.