濮阳东方看妇科病价格公开(濮阳东方口碑好很放心) (今日更新中)

The battle over MCAS flight paths continues. For years, residents have expressed concerns about noise, pollution and potential crashes. Earlier this month, councilwoman Barbara Bry wrote a letter to MCAS asking pilots ot adhere to flight corridors that avoid direct traffic over University City. Neighbors in the area are still coping from the 2008 crash that killed four people when a jet went spiraling into two homes. "We’ve already had one accident in UC years ago," said Don Hoetz. "Right below that flight path and we just don’t want to see that happen again."MCAS released a statement to 10news, saying in part;"All aircraft routes, including departures over University City, depend on a myriad offactors including weather, other air traffic, and the flight characteristics of the aircraft. In all cases, aircraft use navigable airspace in a manner authorized by the FAA."Colonel Charles Dockery responded to councilwoman Bry's letter Thursday morning. He reiterated that all of the flights they use are approved by the FAA and said they must prioritize safety over noise. 1089

Starting next week, KFC will offer their Beyond Fried Chicken product in select restaurants on the West Coast. The plant-based protein product debuted last year in Atlanta, and earlier this year in Nashville and Charlotte.According to a statement from KFC, testing in those markets “received an overwhelmingly positive consumer response,” and they are rolling it out in more cities.More than 50 restaurants in the Los Angeles, Orange County and San Diego area will offer Beyond Fried Chicken starting July 20.Beyond Fried Chicken was developed in partnership with Beyond Meat, a company specializing in creating plant-based protein products.Beyond Meat has partnered with dozens of restaurants and facilities to create plant-based protein menu options, including Carl’s Jr., Dog Haus, Black Bear Diner, Pizza Rev and LEGOLand. 834

The 2020 holiday shopping season will be different from all other years due to the coronavirus pandemic.Target on Thursday became the latest major retailer to outline how it will attempt to keep is employees safe during the busy holiday shopping season.For one, Target expects to match 2019 hiring levels despite a downtrodden economy. The company said that it will double its staff dedicated to contactless shopping options, like its “Drive Up” service.Target said that seasonal employees will be given free access to virtual doctor visits through the end of the year, backup daycare, mental health services, and PPE. Seasonal employees, in addition to current staff, will also be paid for up to 14 days if required to quarantine or have a confirmed coronavirus-related illness."The success of our business strategy rests on the strength of our team and their ability to adjust quickly to the needs of our guests and their changing shopping patterns," said Melissa Kremer, Target's Chief Human Resources Officer. "Throughout the year, the team has successfully balanced strong demand in our stores with surging digital volume. Knowing that the holiday season will be unlike any other, we're building in even more flexibility to make sure Target remains a safe and convenient place to work and shop, while investing in our team's industry-leading pay and benefits." 1373

Tailored Brands, which owns Men's Wearhouse and Jos. A. Bank, announced on Tuesday that they would be closing up to 500 stores due to the coronavirus pandemic.The company said in a press release that they would cut 20% of its corporate jobs by the end of the fiscal second quarter.“We have safely reopened almost all of our retail stores and look forward to helping our customers look and feel their best for their moments that matter," Tailored Brands President and CEO Dinesh Lathi said in the press release. "Unfortunately, due to the COVID-19 pandemic and its significant impact on our business, further actions are needed to help us strengthen our financial position so we can navigate our current realities. It is always difficult to eliminate jobs and say farewell to our friends and colleagues. I want to thank our teammates affected by these changes as well as those who continue to help us meet the challenges currently facing our industry and who remain dedicated to serving our customers.”The clothing company also announced that Chief Financial Officer Jack Calandra was leaving on July 31 and they appointed restructuring consultancy AlixPartners managing director Holly Etlin as their Chief Restructuring Officer. 1236

Starting Social Security early typically means getting a smaller benefit for the rest of your life. The penalty is steep: Someone who applies this year at age 62 would see their monthly benefit check reduced by nearly 30%.Many Americans have little choice but to accept the diminished payments. Even before the pandemic, about half of retirees said they quit working earlier than they’d planned, often due to job loss or health issues. Some have enough retirement savings to delay claiming Social Security, but many don’t. And now, with unemployment approaching Depression-era levels, claiming early may be the best of bad options for older people who can’t find a job.But the penalty for early filing, and the bonus for delaying your application, are based on old formulas that don’t reflect gains in life expectancy, says economist Alicia Munnell, director of the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College. The result is a system that unfairly penalizes early filers, unjustly benefits late filers — and hurts lower-income people the most.“Low-income people disproportionately collect benefits at 62 and their benefits are cut too much, and high-income people disproportionately delay claiming till 70 and their benefits are increased too much,” Munnell says. “So you penalize the low-income and you benefit the high-income.”The problem started off as a solutionOriginally, Social Security had one retirement age: 65. In 1956, Congress authorized a reduced benefit for women, to allow them to retire at the same time as their typically older husbands. The reduced benefit option was extended to men in 1961.The amount of the reduction was meant to be “actuarially neutral,” so that the cost to Social Security would be the same whether those with average life expectancies claimed the smaller check earlier or the larger check later.As life expectancies rose, though, early filers wound up living with the penalty for longer. In 1956, a 65-year-old woman had an average life expectancy of 16.9 years. Today, it’s 21.6 years, Munnell says. Instead of being actuarially neutral, in other words, the current system results in early filers with average life expectancies getting less.On top of that, Social Security offers a bonus for those who can afford to wait. A 1% delayed retirement credit was introduced in 1972, and the amount was increased over the years to the current 8%. So each year you put off claiming Social Security past your full retirement age adds 8% to your payment. Full retirement age varies according to birth year and is 67 for people born in 1960 or later.Let’s say your full retirement age is 67 and your benefit, if started then, would be ,000 a month. Starting at 62 would shrink the benefit to 0, while waiting until 70 to begin would boost the amount to ,240.The longer you live, the more you can benefit from a delayed filing — and the higher your income, the longer you’re likely to live. In fact, most of the gains in life expectancy in recent years have accrued to higher-income people.Between 2001 and 2014, for example, life expectancy rose by more than two years for men and nearly three years for women with incomes in the top 5%, according to a study for the Social Security Administration. During the same period, life expectancies for those in the bottom 5% of incomes rose a little less than four months for men and about two weeks for women.How benefits could change to be fairerTo restore actuarial fairness, the penalty for early filing should be lower, Munnell says. Someone who retires at 62 instead of 67 should get 22.5% less, rather than 30% less. Similarly, the bonus for waiting should be reduced to just below 7% per year.“The way it’s set up now, people will get 124% of their full benefit if they wait till 70 and they really should only get 120%,” Munnell says.Obviously, Social Security has bigger problems. Once its trust fund is depleted, as projected in 15 years or so, the system will be able to pay only 79% of promised benefits in 2035. That proportion is estimated to drop to 73% by 2094.When Congress finally gets around to fixing the system, Munnell says, it should consider making the payouts more fair.“I think there’ll be some grand bargain on Social Security at some point because I don’t think anybody’s really going to allow benefits to be cut 25%,” Munnell says. “This [actuarial fairness] probably should be put on the agenda.”This article was written by NerdWallet and was originally published by the Associated Press.More From NerdWalletHow to Renegotiate Your Bills to Save MoneyFeeling Out of Control? These Money Moves Could HelpRenters at Risk: Ways to Cope in the Financial CrisisLiz Weston is a writer at NerdWallet. Email: lweston@nerdwallet.com. Twitter: @lizweston. 4771

来源：资阳报