for breaking news visit www.timesnewsweekly.com JULY 9, 2015 • times 13 FOR BREAKING NEWS VISIT www.couriersun.com JULY 9, 2015 • THE COURIER SUN 27 oped Retirement: Not A LOOK BACK a Look back just a luxury for the rich BY PUBLIC ADVOCATE LETITIA JAMES When we think of retirement, we like to imagine years of relaxation The recent opening of a film studio in Glendale isn’t the first time the western Queens community has played a part in film production. The Glendale Studio pictured above was once located on Myrtle Avenue between present-day 88th Lane and 88th Place on the grounds of a former picnic park. Between 1915 and 1925, the studio played host to the production of various silent films. The first “talkie” would debut in 1929, four years after Glendale Studio moved its productions to Hollywood. The studio was reconfigured into a sports facility before being torn down during the 1930s to make way for the Interborough (presentday Jackie Robinson) Parkway. Got a historic picture of Queens you want to share with our readers? Email it to [email protected], and it may be featured in a future edition of A Look Back. Ron Isaac, Fresh Meadows We would like to hear your opinions on anything you read View More in this newspaper. Neighborhood News Send it to [email protected] letters Lamenting the state heaLth care surcharge My recent hospital bill had an asterisk at the bottom noting, “includes New York State surcharge tax,” so I decided to investigate. I was shocked to discover that since 1996, New York State has imposed a 9.63 percent surcharge on patient care from licensed health care providers. Every time we go to a hospital or a clinic or a doctor’s office, the state adds a 9.63 percent surcharge to the bill. While insurance companies pay the surcharge, they pass it on to patients directly or through higher premiums. This surcharge has been in effect for almost 20 years, but strangely it’s only been indicated on some medical bills since last year, when over $2.8 billion was collected. These billions in surcharges are used for Medicaid and to cover those who are uninsured or can’t pay. Health care is increasingly unaffordable. Many people with coverage don’t get needed care because they can’t afford the high co-pays and deductibiles after paying their premiums. Meanwhile, all New Yorkers receiving medical care must pay extra to cover the poor, while the rich get new tax breaks on their estates, yachts and private planes. If corporations and the obscenely wealthy residents of New York had to pay their fair share, maybe the rest of us wouldn’t have to pay surcharges in addition to high taxes. Linda Imhauser, Whitestone teacher’s choice stipend a drop in the bucket For many years, public school teachers received a yearly stipend which they spent largely at their discretion on items they determined their students needed. This program, called Teacher’s Choice, was not intended as a substitute, but rather as a supplement to the mandated but shortchanged supplies. Teachers were accountable for their expenditures and were content to submit receipts and proof that purchases were strictly for instructional use. Some principals violated the intent of Teacher’s Choice by denying teachers basic supplies that they were due, such as xerographic paper for exams, and intimidated these educators into diverting a portion of their separate Teacher’s Choice entitlement to make up for it. The Teacher’s Choice stipend was modest yet helpful. Though not sufficient to make up the slack of unfurnished materials, it was nonetheless reduced to an even smaller allowance and abolished altogether in 2011. A citywide financial pinch was blamed. Teacher’s Choice was restored, though not to its former robustness. The good news is that Mayor de Blasio and City Council Speaker Mark-Viverito included $965 million for Teacher’s Choice in the recently finalized budget. That’s an appreciated shot in the arm but hardly jolting. Teacher’s Choice, welcomed as it is, will not put a dent in the cost of delivering to students all the essential tools for their learning. If those expenses are not covered, who will foot the bill? Teachers, of course! Typical educators will continue to pay out of their own pockets, even if they are only partially reimbursed or not at all. Why? Because as the Geico commercial says, “It’s what they do!” Ron Isaac, Fresh Meadows Visit Queenscourier.com For more stories after a lifetime of hard work. But the unfortunate reality for millions of New Yorkers is that retirement is more likely to be a time of desperation and abject poverty. That’s because the current retirement system is broken. Pensions, once the hallmark of retirement savings, are becoming a luxury of the past. In 1985, over half of American workers nearing retirement had a defined benefit plan, but in 2009 only 29 percent were expecting pension income in retirement. And Social Security has faced brazen attacks in Washington, threatening the future of a vital benefit that has provided retirement security for millions since the New Deal. In light of this grim reality, the time is now for New York City to offer new avenues for retirement savings for all New Yorkers. Last month, my office issued a report highlighting the urgent need for New York City to take action against an impending retirement crisis. By 2035, the city’s senior population is expected to explode to 1.5 million — a dramatic increase from the number of seniors today. Meanwhile, recent data shows that only 41 percent of working New Yorkers have access to an employer-sponsored retirement plan, down from 49 percent a decade ago. If current trends continue, everyday retired New Yorkers will struggle to pay the bills as they fight to survive on fixed incomes. My report found that for a retiree in New York City to live at the poverty line for 15 years, they would need over $215,000 in savings and income. But most New Yorkers today have less than $100,000 saved for retirement, and over 40 percent have under $10,000 saved. The savings problem is even more acute for communities of color and women. Over 75 percent of black households and 80 percent of Latino households have less than $10,000 in retirement. And, nationally, there are twice as many women than men living in poverty. The lack of affordable housing in New York City has also hit retired New Yorkers especially hard. Forty seven percent of New Yorkers over the age of 70 are considered rent burdened, forcing many seniors to choose between housing, food and transportation. That’s why I have introduced legislation in the City Council that would help move forward the process of creating a city-based retirement savings program — a program that would place no significant financial burden on taxpayers or private employers, but uplift millions of New Yorkers for generations to come. Accounts would be pooled and centrally managed, which will help keep fees low given the expected high participation rates. States like California, Illinois and Massachusetts are already moving forward with similar programs, and New York City cannot fall behind. Retirement should not just be a luxury for the rich, and I am determined to do everything I can to ensure every working New Yorker can live out their golden years in dignity. ridgewoodtimes.com
RT07092015
To see the actual publication please follow the link above