It’s probably not great news that nearly a quarter of Americans have no plans to retire, since that suggests that they’re not saving money to get them through their later years.
Most of us probably remember learning things in high school that we rarely if ever use as adults – like how to calculate the area of a trapezoid or how to solve a quadratic equation.
A school in Colorado Springs, Colorado was shuttered.
In Three Rivers, Oregon, the school board shortened the school year five days and laid off employees.
It had been a few years since Ethan Wade got a crowd of Yellow Jacket fans fired up.
“Did y’all see that?” he shouted to the Dooley Field sidelines just before kickoff Saturday night. “I just did two cartwheels!”
It’s year three of the gas tax hike. Under the 2017 law, the gas tax rises by two cents every year through 2022. Lawmakers promised that every penny would go toward repairing roads and bridges, but although $615.2 million has been collected since the law passed, very little has been spent.
Seven and a quarter percent.
That’s the official “assumed rate of return” for South Carolina’s retiree pension system. In other words, state officials tell us the system should expect to earn 7.25 percent on its assets for decades to come.
Followers of today’s political news are treated to plenty of fireworks, fanfare and theatrics. There’s talk of contempt charges and “constitutional crises,” of tariffs and of the emergence of socialism in American politics. Presidential candidates are making grand promises and are ratcheting up the rhetoric as they elbow for the spotlight.
There’s a lot of disappointment about the Legislature’s failure to deliver this year on its promise of transformational reform of South Carolina’s education system, particularly but certainly not exclusively among teachers.
An important new study by the nonprofit RAND Corp. should have a major impact on the public debate about the costs of health care.
Among the arguments offered by opponents of South Carolina’s recently-enacted gas tax hike was that the state’s highway maintenance spending had historically been inefficient and poorly prioritized. Why should we believe these new tax dollars would be wisely spent, they asked.