PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Craig Copeland

Publications and source records attributed to Craig Copeland.

16 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2005

Encouraging workers to save: the 2005 Retirement Confidence Survey.

This Issue Brief reports findings of the 15th annual Retirement Confidence Survey (RCS), which points to potential solutions to the American retirement savings problem, specifically ways that could help workers save more through their employment-based retirement plans. IMPORTANCE OF EMPLOYER MATCH: More than 7 in 10 workers not currently contributing to their employer-sponsored retirement plan say an employer contribution of up to 5 percent of their salary would make them much more or somewhat more likely to participate (72 percent). SIMPLIFIED OPTIONS: Other retirement plan options that nonparticipants say would make them more likely to contribute are an investment option that automatically becomes more conservative as their retirement date approaches (66 percent) and a feature that automatically raises workers' contributions by a fixed amount or percentage when they receive a pay raise (55 percent). Two-thirds of nonparticipants indicate they would be very or somewhat likely to remain in their employer's plan if they were automatically enrolled (66 percent). SOCIAL SECURITY: Nearly 7 in 10 of today's workers are skeptical that Social Security will continue to provide benefits of at least equal value to those received by current retirees (68 percent). This proportion has remained relatively constant in recent years, but is below the 1995 level (79 percent). Workers continue to be unable to identify the age at which they will be eligible for full Social Security benefits. MOST BEHIND SCHEDULE IN SAVING: A majority of workers believe they are behind schedule when it comes to planning and saving for retirement (55 percent). Most of those behind schedule say that high expenses, particularly everyday expenses (49 percent), child-rearing expenses (39 percent), and medical costs (35 percent), are a major factor in keeping them from saving. LESS THAN HALF HAVE TRIED TO CALCULATE NEEDED SAVINGS: Approximately 4 in 10 workers say they have tried to calculate how much they need to accumulate for retirement. More than one-third of these workers say they asked a financial advisor to calculate this number or used their own estimates; 10 percent say they simply guessed how much they will need in retirement.

Data Collection↗
PubMed2005

Comparing Social Security reform options.

Social Security is widely recognized as the nation's most effective anti-poverty program for the elderly and widow(er)s. It is so popular that it has often been dubbed the "third rail" of American politics ("touch it and you die"). As a result, changes have come slowly. For instance, in spite of years of warning in advance of the cash flow crisis of 1983, Congress waited until the last minute to act--and when it did, the action it took included a combination of tax increases and benefit reductions. By the mid-1990s, then-President Clinton was talking about the long-term financing issues faced by Social Security, but Congress did not act. President Bush has raised the same issues since 2000, and has now taken to the road to convince the nation that action should be taken now to assure the program's long-term solvency. Because Social Security is a sensitive, complicated, and emotional political topic, many concepts have been discussed but few elected officials have been willing to put forth detailed plans for fear of political backlash. The public, quite naturally, wants to know how they will be affected by "reform." In this introductory section, Figure S-1 seeks to provide a simple response to that question by following the method used in the Trustees' report, where earners maintain a constant percentage of the average wage. Take the year closest to when you were born, the earnings closest to your expected earnings this year (2005), and follow across the columns to see how much your annual benefit would be in today's dollars if you start taking benefits at age 65. For an example of a specific individual: Your 30-year-old child (born in 1975) makes a 2005 salary around $16,500. Under current law, your child's initial annual Social Security retirement benefit would be dollar 11,200 in today's dollars. However, given the projected funding shortfall currently facing the program, this promised benefit is not likely to materialize unless some sort of change is made to the program. This analysis compares "Model 2" from the President's 2001 Commission to Strengthen Social Security (which appears to have the principles for an individual account plan favored by the Bush administration) with three basic options: Current-law benefits with taxes raised to cover the shortfall over the 75-year actuarial period, by removing the existing dollar 90,000 annual wage cap and including all workers. Maintain current benefits until the revenue shortfall occurs, when a "cliff" benefit cut is imposed. A gradual reduction in current-law benefits.

Aged↗
PubMed2002

Retirement plan participation and features and standard of living of Americans 55 or older.

This Issue Brief is the third in a series of Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI) publications based on data collected in 1998 and released in 2002 as the Retirement and Pension Plan Coverage Topical Module of the 1996 Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP). This report completes the series by examining the survey's more detailed questions concerning workers' employment-based retirement plans. Specifically, it examines the percentage of workers who are participating in a plan, and also workers' reasons for not participating in a plan when working in a job where a plan is sponsored; the features of, or decisions made concerning salary reduction plans; historical participation in employment-based retirement plans; and a comparison of the standard of living of individuals age 55 or older with their living standard in their early 50s. As of June 1998, 64.3 percent of wage and salary workers age 16 or older worked for an employer or union that sponsored any type of retirement plan (defined contribution or defined benefit) for any of its employees or members (the "sponsorship rate"). Almost 47 percent of these wage and salary workers participated in a plan (the "participation rate"), with 43.2 percent being entitled to a benefit or eligible to receive a lump-sum distribution from a plan if their job terminated at the time of survey (the "vested rate"). The predominant reason for choosing not to participate in a retirement plan was that doing so was unaffordable. The eligible participation rate for salary reduction plans was 81.4 percent. Fifty-six percent of all workers have participated in some type of retirement plan sometime during their work life through 1998. For those ages 51-60, almost 72 percent have ever participated in a plan. The median account balance in salary reduction plans in 1998 was $14,000. In 1998, 12.9 percent of salary reduction plan participants eligible to take a loan had done so, and the average outstanding loan balance was $5,196. Nearly 80 percent of those age 55 or older reported that their standard of living is about the same or better now than it was when they were in their early 50s. The incidence of both pension income and health insurance from a former employer had a significant impact on retirees' ability to maintain their standard of living. In addition, those who spent their entire most recent lump-sum distribution were more likely to have a much worse standard of living in retirement than those who rolled over their entire most recent distribution.

Adolescent↗