濮阳东方男科医院口碑评价高(濮阳东方男科医院很专业) (今日更新中)

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and Rep. Beto O'Rourke met during a chance encounter at a Texas airport this week, where the two reportedly exchanged kind words and discussed how they could "move forward" together just days after a highly-contentious Senate election.Cruz, a conservative Republican, beat O'Rourke, a rising star in the Democratic Party, in last week's midterm elections.The encounter was posted on Tuesday on Twitter and Facebook by Tiffany Easter, who posed in photos with the two Texas politicians, writing that "Beto noticed Ted sitting down and walked over to congratulate him on his re-election and campaign.""It was the first time they had seen each other since the election and the entire conversation was both of them talking about how they could move forward TOGETHER," Easter wrote on Facebook."Today we literally watched them come together. This is America. This is good. This is wholesome," she said, adding that she was in "awe" of the "humility" the two showed.Both Cruz and O'Rourke's campaigns did not immediately respond to CNN's request for comment Thursday morning. 1102

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

gest campaign around International Women's Day, called We See Equal, in 2017 and continued to build on it this year.Allison Tummon Kamphuis, who leads P&G's gender equality program, explained that the company's first big push came after it named gender equality as one of its initiatives in 2016.In previous years, P&G observed International Women's Day internally, with lectures and events for staff. Now, the company hosts several public-facing events, including a discussion with Katie Couric and an interactive exhibit called "Women at Work: Myth vs Reality."Firat pointed to P&G as a company that has genuinely committed to promoting gender equality.While some brands have given International Women's Day a lot of thought, others are still trying to figure out a way in. Firat said that some companies hope a campaign featuring women's empowerment will help them reach Millennials, who tend to value brands that embrace social causes.Calkins suggested that some companies may also be chasing the success of others."Marketers watch what other marketers are doing," he said."When companies see high-profile campaigns that get some traction ... they are very quick to jump on the bandwagon."Though there are advantages to joining a conversation about gender, there are also risks. "If you're going to be out there celebrating your commitment to gender equality, then it does invite some scrutiny," Calkins said.One example, he said, is the "Fearless Girl" statue.The sculpture was conceived by the powerful financial group State Street and advertising firm McCann as a way to spread awareness of State Street's efforts to increase gender diversity on corporate boards.The campaign was an overwhelming success People fell in love with the statue of the defiant girl staring down the "Charging Bull" in New York City, and she quickly became a symbol of resistance and empowerment.But the sculpture's prominence put State Street in the spotlight when it agreed to pay million to settle allegations that it underpaid female and black employees. The firm denied any wrongdoing.And McDonald's, which has faced protests by employees seeking higher wages, is already being criticized for honoring the day with what some see as an empty gesture.  3975

Thank you to all my friends and followers for all the prayers and kind wishes.I’m getting great care and feeling good.Recovering quickly and keeping up with everything.— Rudy W. Giuliani (@RudyGiuliani) December 7, 2020 227

Students around the country have started to sign petitions, demanding colleges reduce tuition costs amid the pandemic. A recent survey by OneClass.com shows 93 percent of college students feel tuition should be reduced this semester since most classes will be held online.“I feel terrible, you know, by this one semester that I have to pay the exact same amount as I would by getting a whole college experience,” said Gabrielle Perez.Perez is a junior at Michigan State University and is one of many college students demanding lower tuition with online classes. She started a petition at her school, claiming “online classes hold a far less value compared to those that were once in a classroom”“You are at a Big Ten school. I am paying for a Big Ten school. I’m not getting the Big Ten-school experience,” said Perez.Currently, MSU has only committed to a tuition freeze, which essentially keeps tuition the same as the previous two years. However, around the country, other higher education institutions have begun reducing their tuition.Georgetown University, Princeton University, Lafayette College, Rowan University, Spelman College, Clark Atlanta University, and American University are just some of the higher education institutions that have lowered tuition by 10 percent. Schools like Hampton University and Williams College have lowered their tuition by 15 percent, while Southern New Hampshire University (SNHU) announced it will be offering incoming freshman full-tuition scholarships for the first year. All other SNHU students will have their tuition rate slashed from ,000 to ,000.Most schools have held strong in maintaining current tuition rates, with a few even raising tuition.“You can’t talk about prices and what institutions are charging students without talking about cost,” said Denisa Gandara, an assistant professor of educational policy and leadership at Southern Methodist University. “In many cases, the costs are going up.”Gandara explained many higher education institutions are reluctant to reduce tuition because of additional costs this year. Those additional costs include the cost of remote-learning equipment, training instructors to teach remotely effectively, and higher health insurance premiums.“I imagine institutions are still looking at their numbers and trying to decide whether they do need to lower their prices to attract more students,” she said.Some fear a significant number of college students will drop out or take the semester off, and some students have threatened that in their petitions.“You have so much time to go back to college anyways, that this one semester or maybe a whole year is not going to define you,” said Perez.Financial experts like Calvin Williams, Jr., CEO at Freeman Capital, believe a semester or two away from a four-year higher education institution may not be so bad after all. In fact, from a financial perspective both short and long-term, he is encouraging students to do this.During this pandemic, his company has been providing college students with advice on how to save on college tuition. One major way to save, according to William, Jr., is to consider taking transferable classes at a community college where tuition is already drastically lower than that at a four-year college or university.“Going down the community college-first route, for at least a COVID time like this, it will allow you to save money on tuition on room and board, and you will have a lot of flexibility in a year or two when you transfer to a four-year, carry those credits but carry less debt,” said William, Jr. 3592

来源：资阳报