Defining the concept of economic security for all women - Policy recommendations to boost women’s economic security

Thu, 05 Jul 2018  |  

I prepared a research paper on issues associated with the economic and financial security for women. The report is being considered by the Minister for Women, Kelly O’Dwyer and will be part of a bi-partisan parliamentary discussion on the critical policy issues associated that can be developed to enhance the economic security for women.

The report can be seen at this link: https://www.security4women.org.au/wp-content/uploads/20180625-eS4W_White-Paper_Defining-the-Concept-of-Economic-Security-for-Women.pdf 

------------------------------------------------------ 

Defining the concept of economic security for all women & Policy recommendations to boost women’s economic security

Boosting Economic Security for All Women

OBJECTIVE: To raise awareness and contribute effectively to development and implementation of policy that impacts all women living in Australia and ensures women’s equal place in society, in the Government’s policy priority area of improving women’s economic independence and financial security.

The current policy approach to childcare, superannuation, education, jobs and financial literacy is not keeping up with changes in social attitudes, structural changes in the economy and demographic changes.

The paper brings together research and analysis of specific issues that feed into the overarching issues of economic and financial security for women. We are grateful for the efforts, thoroughness and insightful nature of that work. This paper highlights some of the policy reforms that will be needed if women’s financial and economic security is to be enhanced.

It is a next step in the process that will inevitably be built upon as steps are taken to improve economic security for women.

Economic Security for Women

One of the well-established and central platforms of economic and social policy is to deliver economic and financial security for all members of society.

Economic security entails a number of basic conditions, but has as a central underpinning an ability, throughout life, to afford to have shelter, food and basic living expenses covered. Financial security also means opening access to opportunities not only at these basic levels of living standards, but to also achieve higher levels of security and well-being through education, training and employment opportunities.

Paid employment is one of the benchmarks for financial security, but in the circumstances where many women have either sporadic or minimal opportunities to engage in paid work throughout their adult life, a government provided, broadly based, financial safety net is essential if economic security for women is to be enhanced.

Why economic security for women?

Enhancing economic and financial security for women will not be achieved by undermining and lowering economic security for men. This is not about the tradeoff.

Rather, this important issue identifies areas where women’s economic security is lower or more precarious than for men, it uncovers reasons why this is likely to have occurred and canvasses policy and other issues that can be put in place to lift the economic status and financial well-being of women.

The case for women and issues of lower economic security than men

Australia is a high-income country, with most measures of lifestyle and well-being amongst the highest in the world. Continued economic growth and rising wealth have been the hallmarks of the economy over many decades.

The benefits of these favourable economic fundamentals have not been evenly shared, with women continuing to lag men in terms of jobs, incomes and superannuation balances. There is qualitative evidence that women have a lower level of awareness and understanding about personal finances, including superannuation, than men.

The evidence for Australia confirms that women are persistently and overwhelmingly less economically secure than men.

comments powered by Disqus

THE LATEST FROM THE KOUK

Trump boosts US stocks with borrowed government money

Thu, 20 Sep 2018

This article first appeared on the Yahoo 7 Finance website at this link: https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/trump-boosts-us-stocks-borrowed-government-money-011637215.html 

--------------------------------------------------- 

Trump boosts US stocks with BORROWED government money

US stock prices continue to trade at near record highs and a lot of the recent rise has a lot to do with the policies of President Donald Trump.

The surge in the Dow Jones Industrial Average has been phenomenal. Since the November 2016 Presidential election, the Dow Jones is up around 50 per cent despite a few hiccups at the start of 2018 as the US Federal Reserve hiked interest rates and the threats of a US trade war turned into a reality.

The rise in US stocks, whilst impressive, is built on all the wrong things. ‘Wrong’, that is, in terms of sustainability.

As President, Donald Trump has delivered a range of tax cuts that have a total cost to the budget of around US$1.5 trillion. This one-off, impossible to replicate policy like any other policy that dumps cash into the economy has underpinned stronger economic growth and a temporary lift company profits. The tax changes has seen US companies engage in a record level of stock buy-backs which by design, has been a powerful driver behind rising share prices.

The problem with the Trump tax cuts is that every cent of the US$1.5 trillion has been funded with money borrowed by the government.

Such is the destruction to the US budget, that the US Congressional Budget Office is now estimating the US budget deficit to average a staggering 4.8 per cent of GDP in every year in the decade from 2018 to 2028. When Trump became President, the budget deficit had narrowed to just 2.5 per cent of GDP.

Everyone stopped talking about government debt, but here's why it still matters

Wed, 19 Sep 2018

This article first appeared on the Business Insider website at this link: https://www.businessinsider.com.au/government-debt-stephen-koukoulas-2018-9 

------------------------------------------------------------- 

Everyone stopped talking about government debt, but here's why it still matters

Having been a headline issue for many years, government debt no longer gets the media or political focus that is used to.

At one level, this is odd, because the level of gross and net government debt have continued to rise unrelentingly in recent years, with gross debt at a record high and net debt touching a peace-time high.

The lack of focus on government debt probably reflects the fall from grace of the chief debt fear-mongers Tony Abbott, Joe Hockey and Barnaby Joyce who were vocal advocates of the “debt and deficit disaster” that Australia was allegedly confronting five years ago. 

The fact that the Coalition government has demonstrably failed in its policy approach to the issue is also likely to be a factor why it has dropped off the list of popular political topics. It could also reflect the fact the belated realisation that Australia level of debt and deficit are, and always have been, low and manageable.

So low is Australia’s government debt, even today, that the three major sovereign credit ratings agencies have assigned a triple-A rating even though the path to a balanced budget and debt stabilisation has been slow and unconvincing.
This is not to say that the level of government debt is not an issue. It still is.

And just because it is not a constraint on the economy or a meaningful concern to markets, it doesn’t mean policy makers should take their eye off managing government debt, especially at the moment when the economy is growing and the global economy is giving Australia a helping hand.

Sensible and pragmatic economists are usually pragmatic about debt and deficit. Pragmatic in a sense that a move to debt and deficit are good policy when the economy is weak and debt reduction and surplus are good policy when the economy is growing strongly. Suffice to say it will be important to ensure that the path to small, but growing, budget surpluses over the next few years is kept, but only if the economy continues to grow at a reasonable pace.