We are all for gender equality, but unfortunately some/most politicians are unwilling to argue against what on the surface seems like an issue:
On average, women currently retire with $90,000 less than men.
https://www.industrysuper.com/campaigns/closing-the-gender-superannuation-gap/
We don’t dispute that figure, but it can be misleading, in three significant ways:
- If the woman is in a relationship upon retirement, then they would typically share their super with their partner, to live on
- Women typically live longer, and will typically inherit their partner’s super
- When divorce is negotiated, super is typically a factor in deciding who gets what – they don’t get their partner’s super, but rather something else like cash or property
For women who have not been in lasting relationships, where they cannot access the super of their partners, that is a different story. Those without children presumably have less super disadvantages (less reason to not work full time), and those with children would be in the worst position of all.
If we wish to increase the living standards of solo mothers, before or after retirement age, that is a probably best discussed in an holistic way, rather than just looking at super.