OK, maybe it’s a slight exaggeration, but almost everyone—99 percent of Americans and all members of Congress—will win if the GOP health plan fails.
The rule, by design, will prevent people from receiving conflicted advice, that is to say, bad advice, but will not adversely affect retirement savers. The delay is simply an attempt by the Trump administration, which is packed with Wall Street alumni, to enable financial firms to continue to pick savers’ pockets.
While the headlines are dominated by White House leaks and personnel scandals, the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress have been quietly helping the financial industry siphon off your retirement savings
I seem to have hit a nerve by pointing out that a paper purporting to compare public- and private-sector workers in Connecticut excluded 82 percent of public-sector workers from the sample used to compare wages and salaries.
401(k)s were never intended to replace pensions, so it should be no surprise that they aren’t up to the task.
The latest proposal, from House Social Security Subcommittee Chairman Sam Johnson (R-Texas), actually slashes benefits even more than would be sufficient to close Social Security’s projected shortfall. The extra savings generated by these cuts is used to reduce taxes on higher-income households.
With a raised hand, my daughter’s teacher can magically line up 20 kindergarteners who are running circles around a loud gym.
The Yankee Institute for Public Policy has published a report claiming that compensation for public-sector workers in Connecticut is 25 percent to 46 percent higher than for comparable workers in the private sector.
Hispanic workers lag far behind other workers in retirement plan participation. In 2012, just 34 percent of prime-working-age Hispanic workers employed 35 or more hours per week were enrolled in an employer-based plan, compared with 59 percent of their non-Hispanic white counterparts.
The annual Social Security and Medicare trustees’ reports will be released today, prompting the usual scaremongering enabled by a widespread misunderstanding of how these programs operate and what deficits mean. As is always the case, it is helpful to separate out analyses of Social Security from Medicare, as they are different institutions facing very different challenges.
This week marks the beginning of summer—family reunions, barbeques, and beach vacations— for those who can afford it. Those who can’t include hotel housekeepers, who like many U.S.
Thank you for inviting me to testify today.
My name is Monique Morrissey. I am an economist at the Economic Policy Institute and author of The State of American Retirement: How 401(k)s Have Failed Most American Workers, an interactive chartbook accessible through EPI’s website, www.epi.org.
The Washington Post’s editorial board has been arguing for Social Security benefit cuts for years, so their negative reaction to the president’s call to expand the program should come as no surprise.
A rule requiring investment advisors to act in the best interest of clients saving for retirement was released today despite a six-year campaign to weaken or kill it. Secretary of Labor Thomas Perez and his staff deserve enormous credit for persevering.
Women age 65 and older are much more likely to be poor than their male counterparts—and older, minority and unmarried women are at greatest risk.
The shift from pensions to account-type savings plans has been a disaster for lower-income, black, Hispanic, non-college-educated, and single workers, who together add up to a majority of the American population. But even among upper-income white college-educated married couples, many do not have adequate retirement savings or benefits.
The gap in retirement savings is even larger than the gap in retirement plan participation. In 2013, white families between the ages of 32 and 61 had nearly five times as much wealth in retirement accounts as their black counterparts—or nearly $100,000 more in retirement savings.
Many American seniors are not retired: 30 percent of 65–69 year olds in the United States are employed, versus 20 percent in OECD countries on average. This ranks the United States eighth among 35 OECD countries in the share of 65-69-year-olds who are employed.
The president issued a proposed rule requiring all financial advisors to have a fiduciary responsibility to the people they’re advising. This is a no-brainer, even if it’s only a small step toward addressing conflicts of interest in retirement saving. Specifically, Secretary of Labor Thomas Perez and Assistant Secretary Phyllis Borzi hope to curb the practice of inducing people to roll over 401(k) funds into high-cost IRAs, a practice that the president’s Council of Economic Advisors (CEA) estimated costs Americans $17 billion a year.
Many of us reacted to the tentative budget deal with surprised relief. Assuming the agreement holds, the White House was able to lift the debt ceiling and end the sequester without losing limbs in the process, as my colleague Ross Eisenbrey aptly put it.
401(k)s have largely displaced traditional defined benefit pensions among private-sector workers, but they are not a major source of retirement income for seniors.
Alarming statistics that show large declines in the employment and labor force participation of Americans with disabilities are often cited to support the claim that workers in poor health but able to work are increasingly opting out of the workforce to claim disability benefits.
Eighty years ago today, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the Social Security Act into law. Four and a half years later—after the German invasion of Poland but still two years before Pearl Harbor propelled the United States into war—65-year-old Ida May Fuller received the first Social Security check for $22.54. She would live to be 100 years old.
It is reasonable to ask why there has been an increase in the share of awards for musculoskeletal conditions, and why increases in life expectancy due to such factors as a steep decline in smoking and advances in the treatment of cardiovascular disease haven’t led to a decline in overall disability, especially since fewer jobs now require hard physical labor.
Is it possible that SSDI has a noticeable impact on labor force participation, a measure that includes unemployed workers actively looking for work? It might, but as will be detailed in this blog post, there are more likely explanations for the relative decline in labor force participation in the United States compared to Europe, including more supportive labor market policies in Europe.
(This is the third of six blog posts on disability.)
In two earlier blog posts, I look at evidence compiled in Senate testimony by Stanford economist Mark Duggan arguing that financial incentives are driving a growth in disability rolls.
Are disability benefits becoming more generous? The average benefit awarded is roughly a third of the average wage, a ratio that has remained essentially unchanged since 1985. And as Harvard economist Jeffrey Liebman points out, rising inequality and other factors have reduced the value of disability benefits relative to productivity per worker.
A closer look at the evidence shows that SSDI benefits have become, if anything, less generous. Moreover, even research cited by critics shows SSDI receipt has a negligible impact on work effort because few applicants, including marginal applicants who were denied benefits, are able to earn a living afterward.
I testified last week in Harrisburg on a 410-page public pension “reform” bill (SB1) that neither I nor my fellow witnesses had read.
This week marks the 50th anniversary of Head Start, a Great Society program that despite spotty funding has brightened the lives of millions of preschoolers.