上海哪个治肿瘤科医院(上海疏通淋巴最好的方法) (今日更新中)

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

Sunscreen does a good job of protecting our skin, but it may not be so good for marine life.Research studies have found that chemicals found in some popular sunscreen products are harmful to ocean ecosystems. And now, after state lawmakers passed a bill Tuesday, Hawaii is set to become the first state in the US to ban the sale of sunscreens that contain oxybenzone and octinoxate.The chemicals that help us by filtering UV rays are causing severe damage to Hawaii's marine environment, according to a study by Haereticus Environmental Laboratory, a nonprofit scientific organization. They show up in coastal waters after beachgoers swim in the ocean and via discharges from wastewater treatment plants.The study found that the chemicals seep into young coral and contribute to coral bleaching, which occurs when an increase in sea temperatures kills the algae that grows inside coral, turning reefs white and eliminating nutrients that sustain other marine life.About 14,000 tons of sunscreen enter the world's reefs every year, according to a 2015 paper published in the journal Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology.Hawaii's legislation?prohibits the sale and distribution of any sunscreen that contains the two chemicals -- oxybenzone and octinoxate -- without a prescription from a licensed physician.WATCH: Discover how scientists and government officials are trying to rescue coral reefs"Hawaii is the first state in the nation to pass a measure of this magnitude. The world was watching. We delivered. Preserve and protect our ocean environment!" said state Sen. Will Espero on Twitter after the bill passed in his chamber.The bill now goes to the office of Hawaii Governor David Ige. If he signs it, the law would go into effect January 1, 2021.In an effort to protect Hawaii's reefs, Hawaiian Airlines last month began offering passengers free samples of natural sunscreens without those ingredients.The airline is also encouraging its passengers to learn more about Hawaii by showing a 11-minute documentary on each flight about the environmental challenges affecting reefs. 2131

TEMECULA, Calif. (KGTV) -- A San Diego County Sheriff’s Deputy died Saturday in a crash in Temecula, the Department confirmed. According to the Department, Deputy Matthew Creed died after being ejected during single-vehicle a crash on De Portola Road just east of Calle Arboles just after 9 a.m. Saturday. A preliminary investigation determined that the Ford F-150 was being driven at a high rate of speed when it hit the center median and flipped over.RELATED: Man dies after fiery South Bay crashThe truck came to a rest on its roof before catching fire. Three juveniles were in the truck at the time of the crash and were taken to the hospital with non-life threatening injuries. The department sent 10News the following statement: 743

States and districts across the country are unveiling their plans for the nation’s 56 million school children to return back to school. It’s a stressful time for parents and teachers, as well as students. Experts say it’s important to recognize the signs your child may not be ready to go back.“I really want to see friends and see teachers, and like, being actually inside the classroom,” said 14-year-old sophomore Amina Ahmad.Still, there is an uneasiness about whether a return to the classroom would lead to an outbreak.“Some people really are kind of worried about how many students are actually going back and how many people are going to be there,” said Ahmad.Politicians, school administrators, and parents are all weighing the potential risks of returning to the classroom. As novel coronavirus cases surge across the country, experts say the psychological toll on children needs to be addressed.“One of the things that we're seeing a lot is that after being away from that routine for a long time, it is normal for families and for youth to be concerned about ‘how is this going to be?’” said Dr. Tali Raviv, a child clinical psychologist at the Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago who specializes in student mental and health resilience.The American Association of Pediatrics says the benefits of in-person learning outweigh the risks and “…strongly advocates that all policy considerations for the coming school year should start with a goal of having students physically present in school.”But mental health experts say it’s important to understand how each child feels about going back.“Because it's a very different situation if a child is worried, ‘I'm not going to have my best friend with me in my little pod’ than if they're saying ‘I'm worried I'm going to get sick and die’ or ‘you're going to get sick and die,’” explained Dr. Raviv.Dr. Raviv says signs that your student is anxious about returning to school include:Any significant changes in sleep, falling asleep, staying asleep, not wanting to sleep alone or having nightmaresChanges in appetite or a lack of appetiteHeadaches or stomach achesBeing more irritable, frequent meltdownsWithdrawal from friends, family, other activitiesDr. Raviv says if the anxiety is debilitating, it may be time to see a professional.For sophomore Ahmad, her school’s hybrid schedule, alternating in-person and online classes, has put her mind at ease for now. 2448

Steve Wynn is now free to sell his stake in the massive casino business he founded.Wynn Resorts said in a filing on Thursday that Wynn, its former chief executive, and his ex-wife Elaine Wynn, have dissolved an agreement that prevented them from selling their shares.Wynn stepped down as CEO last month after allegations of sexual misconduct piled pressure on the billionaire casino mogul and sent the company's stock tumbling.The company, which operates casinos in Las Vegas and Macau, said in its filing that Steve Wynn may now "seek to sell all or a portion" of the roughly 12 million shares that he owns. Elaine Wynn owns another 10 million shares, giving them a combined 21% stake.Wynn, 76, has denied the accusations of misconduct, which gained widespread attention in late January after an investigative report by The Wall Street Journal detailed numerous allegations against him, citing dozens of sources.Shares in the company were trading above 0 in January, but dropped sharply after the allegations were made public. They have since recovered some lost ground to trade at 6.Wynn Resorts said in a separate filing in February that Wynn would not be allowed to sell more than a third of his stake in any one quarter. That restriction was not mentioned in the documents filed Thursday.Wynn is credited with transforming Las Vegas casinos from gambling dens into entertainment hubs where guests could also watch spectacular shows and eat in high-end restaurants.The Mirage, Wynn's first major casino on the Vegas Strip, opened in 1989. He then opened Treasure Island in 1993, and the Bellagio in 1998.In 2006, he opened his first casino in Macau, where gambling revenues now dwarf those of Las Vegas. An even bigger one, Wynn Palace, followed 10 years later.The-CNN-Wire 1791

来源：资阳报