Baby break - think about the consequences!

In the near future, Dagmar P. now wants to seek a part-time job. And she really wants to do something for her retirement. Her husband earns very well, he supports her project. She could spend 200 euros a month on her pension, she says. I think that's not only good, but also badly needed, and tell her that too. But even during our conversation, she leaves the courage very quickly. Maybe 100 euros would be enough? Or 150 euros? "And is it safe," she asks me then, "that I can put the austerity plan at any time shut down or suspend when it is no longer possible?"

The money is not the despondency, Mr. P. deserves so well. And Dagmar P. has not given any thought to her own economic situation. Since she is in the very best of society, I can only say, because most women do not do this in the situation. And this is independent of education and origin: The young graduate behaves like the secretary or the hotel manager, the hairdresser makes the same mistakes as the engineer or the nurse when it comes to child (s) and career exit.

Because no one thinks about the long-term consequences of their actions, and no one compares what it looks like with the partner - in our example with Werner P: He has a wife and child, a good job, so a regular income. He pays into the statutory pension insurance, has a company pension and also company shares. Of course he has a life insurance, as a direct insurance.

Catching up the years - but how?

And vice versa? Dagmar P. has her husband, her child and a Riester contract, but runs exclusively on the allowances. That is, she pays no contributions there, but receives the government allowances for herself and her three children. That's better than nothing, but more than $ 100 a month of pensions should not be achievable. The ten years that Dagmar P. retired from his job, she can no longer catch up in terms of pensions, and certainly not with part-time work. So she has to make private provision if she does not - like so many women - only with a measly pension and wants to be dependent on her husband. And she has to start immediately and not with the smallest possible, but the largest possible amount!

So that the whole thing stands on firm legs, Dagmar P. could be calculated together with her husband, which claims he has acquired by the continuous occupation and the safeguards. Then she would have to see if and how she gets a similar pension with part-time job and private provision. To put it bluntly again: women get out of working life without any protection, stay home because of the children, then work for years in marginal or part-time employment. There is no such thing as a qualified job or career advancement - nor a decent pension.

Does love blind you?

In my experience, such a conversation with a man would not exist: few men would take such life-threatening risks! So where does this despondency, this pettiness, this modesty come from? Why do women believe they are not allowed to claim anything for themselves? Why is economic independence not desirable for many women? Are these old role models that are still in the minds, according to which women deserve anyway only a "extra income"? No matter where it comes from and why: That has to change! And fast. Every woman must be able to stand on her own financially even when she is old - not just in the event of marriage failing. There is only one thing to help: face the problem and then act. You know: Modesty is a decoration. , , but you can continue without it.