This assumes the money withdrawn was burnt. If the money saved default on a mortgage then the value from that could well outweigh the lower super at retirement. Same if the money saved a business from going bust. The story is reading as Labor/Greens asking biased questions to score political points? And reads as fake news given for many the money was a life saver, so its only telling half the story. The reverse fake news article reports people where the money was critical, and they will be better off in retirement as they saved their home and/or business.