Have they found a way to blame Bush or Reagan yet?
I don’t know how accurate this article is but I lean on the side of them being correct since I have read other articles that indicate women tend to hit poverty after divorce.
http://www.familyfacts.org/briefs/8/marriage-and-poverty
Because they voted Democrat?
Just nationalize everyone’s retirements and make all distributions equal regardless of how much a person worked or saved. Except for the public employee union members of course.
The cause of this is simple: a lifetime of shopping has left them destitute!
They're also more likely to be alive so ... nyah nyah nyah longevity inequality!
We should force retired men into poverty. That way everyone will be equally poor and the liberals will be happy.
Cry me a river...
“And because they tend to live longer, that savings has to last longer, too.”
Well, isn’t that unfair /s
When feminists attacked patriarchy, they destroyed the very institution that protected and provided for them. Discontent fed the independence drive that drove them to complain more and divorce. The family be d@mned a girl has to reach her full potential you know. Family Law changes awarded the discontented independent any children plus cash and prises from the ex she defrauded - but Oprah nation said you go girl, he wasn’t meeting your needs and you can do better. Women in droves free from the patriarchal structures looked to their rich uncle Sam to provide what a husband should, only they did not realize Sam was a cheat who would enslave them far worse than any husband could. In droves they swooned and then voted as Obama promised them they could have sex out of marriage and murder their children, because they didn’t want to punished with a baby. They left the so called oppression of patriarchy that built the nation and ran straight into government slavery. Now they find out that when you make a deal with the Devil you get burned. Only in this case we all are consumed in flames.
they forget men die earlier and they can live off their benefits/monies.
For a large part of my adult life, I have been a stay at home mom. I have two college degrees and worked before my kids and on and off from home now that they are teens. This was a decision my husband and I came to as it was the best for our family, and his job provided more money, more benefits, and more flexibility. Not because he was a man but because of his degree, experience and skill set. My experience and skills also can more easily be used in a career I could have from home.
With that being said, we planned for retirement with both of us equally
covered. My husband has much more life insurance on him, our retirement savings and accounts are equally both of ours, and he has a pension he can begin collecting on when he can retire in 4 years that I am “half owner” of.
So we’ve done what we can do to ensure the best for our retirement,
hopefully together for a long time, but later for the one. It was about
choices and we would of had more for retirement had I worked f/t all those years. But we think we got and gave something money can’t buy with me staying home.
Now if there was ever a divorce, husband would probably complain to the
world how I “am ripping him off” as he “worked”. Oh, trust me, I worked! And I protected myself. But after nearly 20 happy years, I think we did the best possible. If I had been making more, husband would have stayed home.
Women and minority women hardest hit.
That’s gonna suck for all those boomer women who dumped their hubby’s so they could go “find” themselves.
Because they live longer?
Of course, If I mark up my $30,000.00 truck to $60,000.00 and take half off, my truck is half off...even though that is the FULL RETAIL PRICE anyways.
/facepalm
I presume that a significant part of this is due to the shorter life span of men vs that of women. When the husband dies some time before the wife, paying for his illness burns through their savings, leaving the wife essentially destitute.
Just speculation on my part, of course.
How are “women” and “men “ treated so monolithically?