👵 AARP Works to Protect Women’s Retirement Savings (AARP Article)

[Winter2025VA]

FROM THE ARTICLE: We’ve endorsed federal legislation that addresses the financial vulnerability of women retirees.

By Emily Paulin & Natalie Missakian, AARP.

Published March 18, 2025.

Women often earn less money than men throughout their careers and are more likely to leave the workforce to take on family caregiving responsibilities. That may leave them in a precarious position as they approach retirement.

That’s why AARP is backing federal legislation that would improve financial security for older American women and provide resources to help them be independent in retirement.

USE THE LINK BELOW TO READ THE ARTICLE: https://www.aarp.org/politics-society/advocacy/info-2025/protect-womens-retirement-savings.html

[GAKKIEZ]

AARP is wasting so much effort on these endorsements! Women have been told for over 50 years to become more involved in personal financial management but too many failed to do it.  Too many women failed to do more than accept a handout for groceries or other household necessities from a spouse. These women were just too lazy to get involved in household finances. These are the same women that probably praised the spouse for taking such good care of the family!

Too many women with the 'knight in shining armor' dreamer attitudes!  Education and preparation for life failed so many women!

[GailL1]

All I can say is LOL.

Better use of resources would be for women to learn how to protect themselves and save for themselves if they have a shaky marriage.  I am always appalled if I hear of a woman who was married for many years and never took care of anything that was outside of the caring and body washing - I have worked with many older ladies whose spouse had died and they are absolutely lost at the way of the world and especially money matters. 

I think the approval of both spouses before a retirement account is cashed in or changes is an OK part of this legislation but they shouldn’t mention just “WOMEN”  - it should go both ways.  

If women want to save for retirement, they should 1st learn about money, making money and how to use it.  Knowing where the money is is just as important as knowing where the kids are.  

It is their marriage too - so just roll up your sleeves and learn all about the household income and where it is going.  BE A PART OF rather than just the other half of the relationship.

If a divorce comes about - get the best lawyer money can buy and fight for what is yours.  

I don’t agree with the educational funding in this bill - there are already places where the info is readily available or even offered from organizations like this one - AARP.org.  Otherwise, we need to make sure the girls that are growing into women understand that they need to know this info - (actually boys too) so offer money management in school.  

When we start setting up grant programs within legislation like this, that’s when it starts to get out of hand.  Grant funding at $100,000 this year will soon turn into $500,000 in a few years cause all those organizations have salaries that keep going up and also the running of the org.  Let them solicited donation if they need them.  But today there are already plenty of nonprofits that are set up to teach people (men and women, old and young) about money matters.  

[WebWiseWoman]

" I am always appalled if I hear of a woman who was married for many years and never took care of anything that was ..."

Do you honestly think women are stupid about finance? Apparently so; thanks for your support.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts many of our grand-moms and g-grand-moms felt but had no choices for!

Thanks for adding your true thoughts about women of previous generations; thanks for actually nothing.

[GailL1]

@WebWiseWoman 

I not only think it - I actually know many of them.  Their husband dies and they have absolutely NO idea about anything financial oriented - banks accounts, retirement accounts, insurance policies, brokerage accounts.

But it doesn't just end there - they also know nothing about their tax situation - local, state and federal including their property taxes.  They have no idea about some of their liabilities either - credit cards, mortgage, car loans.  

In this stage, they are very gullible to scammers.  

I became my mother’s POA / Guardian at a very young age since my father died young and she was deaf and partially blind.  My father also was not very smart when it came too money issues - when he died, there were stacks of uncashed payroll checks in his drawer - they had no bank account so when they needed cash, he would just take one out and go cash it at the local store.  Neither of them had any concept of making their money work for them.  It didn’t take much money for them to live on - they owned their home, had a big garden and much of other things they just bartered for, like meat / pork / chicken - 

We no longer live in those times of yesteryear and there is absolutely no excuse for a man or a woman in a marital union to not know about their finances - the joint ones and the single ones.

Many of them do have to learn and to me, that is the most important thing - LEARNING and we are really never to old to do that as long as we have the ability to do it.  

I have often thought that for those that can’t or won’t, we should have another assigned to them that will and can.  

[Winter2025VA]

@GailL1 , GOOD feedback!!!  👍  Before, during and after my 1 marriage, I took care of my finances. I just DO NOT understand women who let the man control it all. But hey, as I have always said - NOT my biz and I DONOT judge. Thanks for stopping by. Nicole  👵

[Tonster521]

@Winter2025VA Nicole, if I knew how to place your name ahead of your AARP Forum name, I would do it. Anyway, thanks for your positive replies on another thread in the SS Forum. It was there the other day and today it is not there. It could be my old software or maybe the Moderators are at it again. At any rate, I think I should add my reply/comment in support of women who actually run their households and make all the financial decisions. I worked with Employee Benefits starting in 1974 which happens to coincide with ERISA and many other laws governing employee benefits including the Retirement Equity Act (REA) of 1984. I am tossing the dates out there to inform folks that legislation already exits to protect spouses female and male. I have not read the proposed legislation in detail, but in concept, it sounds like this may be adding new words and expanding prior legislation. Perhaps, Congress should get out of their soft cushion chairs and enforce the existing legislation if there are violations. However, that activity requires work. It is much easier to just create new laws which are mostly redundant. Sometimes, an Amendment to a prior law to correct any shortcomings is just needed. 

I will provide another perspective from were I sat for 31 years in the private sector.When organizations were downsizing by the thousands and closing operations due to global challenges (dumping), most larger companies went above and beyond when reducing the workforce.In the Manufacturing sector (think heavy products - tons not pounds), the operations were mostly male and they earned decent compensation. However, many males had spouses (females) that earned more and had benefits (i.e.,pensions, etc.) that were outstanding. Many female spouses were in education (i.e., teachers, administration,etc.), healthcare, nursing, accounting, government jobs, etc. Moreover, when I conducted exit interviews which included pension and benefit decisions, most of the time, the female spouse ran the household and made the decisions.Even if the female spouse was a Homemaker, many were the decision makers. I realize that not every company is large and compliant with federal legislation. However, will creating a new law change non compliant behavior? Maybe in some cases if enforcement hits the Company's pocketbook.

In the other thread that I referenced, the male worker's spouse predeceased him, and he looked to the Forum for some help. He acknowledged that his spouse was knowledgeable with benefits and administrative decisions. I applaud your take charge efforts.   

[Winter2025VA]

It is okay @Tonster521 .  👍

I am sure this MAY help some women but like the AGE DISCRIMINATION LAWS I am not holding my breath on that. But I believe in keeping my life SIMPLE = at age 67 I would seek employers who WANT me. Lol, NO interest in stress!!!

Thanks for stopping by!!!

Take care,

Nicole  👵

---

[*** @Tonster521 wrote 3/23/25:

@Winter2025VA Nicole, if I knew how to place your name ahead of your AARP Forum name, I would do it. Anyway, thanks for your positive replies on another thread in the SS Forum. It was there the other day and today it is not there. It could be my old software or maybe the Moderators are at it again. At any rate, I think I should add my reply/comment in support of women who actually run their households and make all the financial decisions. I worked with Employee Benefits starting in 1974 which happens to coincide with ERISA and many other laws governing employee benefits including the Retirement Equity Act (REA) of 1984. I am tossing the dates out there to inform folks that legislation already exits to protect spouses female and male. I have not read the proposed legislation in detail, but in concept, it sounds like this may be adding new words and expanding prior legislation. Perhaps, Congress should get out of their soft cushion chairs and enforce the existing legislation if there are violations. However, that activity requires work. It is much easier to just create new laws which are mostly redundant. Sometimes, an Amendment to a prior law to correct any shortcomings is just needed. 

I will provide another perspective from were I sat for 31 years in the private sector.When organizations were downsizing by the thousands and closing operations due to global challenges (dumping), most larger companies went above and beyond when reducing the workforce.In the Manufacturing sector (think heavy products - tons not pounds), the operations were mostly male and they earned decent compensation. However, many males had spouses (females) that earned more and had benefits (i.e.,pensions, etc.) that were outstanding. Many female spouses were in education (i.e., teachers, administration,etc.), healthcare, nursing, accounting, government jobs, etc. Moreover, when I conducted exit interviews which included pension and benefit decisions, most of the time, the female spouse ran the household and made the decisions.Even if the female spouse was a Homemaker, many were the decision makers. I realize that not every company is large and compliant with federal legislation. However, will creating a new law change non compliant behavior? Maybe in some cases if enforcement hits the Company's pocketbook.

In the other thread that I referenced, the male worker's spouse predeceased him, and he looked to the Forum for some help. He acknowledged that his spouse was knowledgeable with benefits and administrative decisions. I applaud your take charge efforts. ***]

---

[WebWiseWoman]

btw, do you think I could at age 17 working for a billionaire who ended up stealing my 5 years of "retirement savings" in 1972 have done anything "right"?

Millions of us from the 60s and 70s lost EVERYTHING to these Billionaire Business Owners before Government protections of retirement funds; now how stupid do you think we were? Please reply because I really want to know!