1,723,027 research outputs found
Correspondence from Oscar E. Monning to Blake D. Scott, January 9, 1958
No full textLetter to Blake D. Scott from Oscar E. Monnig confirming he received the meteorite sent in, with notes by Oscar E. Monnig on the history of how the meteorite was found.1958, January 9 Mr. Blake D. Scott, Forestburg, Texas. Dear Mr. Scott: I want to thank you for telling your wife I goula bring back with me the rook that you found near there. This letter is just to confirm the fact that I have it. I will come back up there and bring it with me sometime within the next month or so, as soon as I can conveniently make it. I feel sure it is an old stone meteorite and I will at that time go with you to the place where itwas [it was] found and perhaps get you to introduce me to a few of the people who live in that region. We should show it to them and see if they have ever found anything similar. I will be out of town for about 2 weeks but will try to call you some week end in the latter part of January or early February, and arrange to see you some Sunday. I hope to make arrangements later to buy it from you. A dollar a pound is considered [is considered] a fair price for these old stony meteorites, but I haven't weighed this one yet. Yours Sincerely, Oscar E. Monnig Identified on trip Jan.1. 1958. Casey Jones phone is 4111. Mrs. Wilson, informant, was at John Moore's, phone 5125. I talked to Mrs. Blake D. Scott (and to Mrs. Galmer?). The object was found about 2-3 wks ago. Scott works on the roads for the county and apparently his blade had hit this rock about 2 1/2 miles (later they said 4 miles) out on the road towards Sunset. He apparently did not see it then, but later recognized it as a strange rock which he did not recall seeing before. Picking it up he noticed the unusual density. Bill Scott, his son, said Wade Poynor, his wife's grandfather, had a considerable collection of rocks. I promised to see these later. Mrs. Wilson is Lena May; she heard of rock and thoughtit [thought it] a meteorite
Chapter 2: How to ensure that savers can get the best products in retirement
Full text linkIn the past, most members of DC pension schemes were required to buy a lifetime annuity at some point during their retirement. The Budget on 19 March 2014 has changed that requirement, as well as opened up the possibility that new types of retirement products will become available. Not all of these will be appropriate, especially if they can lead to people spending all their pension savings before they die. We will examine the new products to see which are most suitable, given the new pension flexibilities. We then consider the most effective way in which scheme members can access the best of these products. In particular, we will look at how ‘longevity insurance’ (e.g., in the form of an immediate or a deferred lifetime annuity) can be combined with ‘scheme drawdown’ to provide a cost-effective institutionally delivered retirement income solution that allows for flexibility in spending during retirement, while ensuring that savers do not run out of money before they die. We end by looking at the best way of helping people deal with stranded pots
Chapter 6: The role of collective pension schemes and how these could be introduced in the UK
Full text linkSupporters of collective defined contribution (CDC) pension schemes claim that they can produce higher and more stable incomes than individual defined contribution (IDC) pension schemes. Broadly speaking, there are two types of CDC scheme in existence: one that is a form of DB replacement and one that is a form of DC replacement. Because CDC schemes claim to have economies of scale that are not available to IDC schemes, we will examine whether this model for collective schemes can also boost incomes in retirement or at least make such incomes more stable across different cohorts of members. We will investigate how their performance might compare with standard IDC schemes. We will examine overseas examples of collective schemes that pool and share risks and hence make incomes in retirement more predictable (at least in principle). We will also consider what effect the new flexibilities for drawing down the pension pot in retirement have for the feasibility of a CDC pension. Finally, we examine an alternative type of collective scheme that might be more compatible with the new pension freedoms, namely collective individual DC (CIDC) schemes
Chapter 5: The role of the National Employment Savings Trust in helping savers to access good quality retirement products
Full text linkThe National Employment Savings Trust (NEST) has revolutionised the DC pension savings market in the UK by providing a high-quality benchmark for private-sector schemes to compare themselves against. We consider whether it can and should do something similar in DC decumulation, both for its own members and for the members of other schemes that do not offer DC decumulation products
Chapter 4: Helping savers to manage longevity risk
Full text linkA particularly important issue in retirement income provision is longevity risk. There are two components to longevity risk. The first is the uncertainty over how long any particular pension scheme member is going to live after retirement. This is known as idiosyncratic longevity risk. Both individuals and schemes face idiosyncratic longevity risk. The second is uncertainty over how long members of a particular age cohort are going to live after retirement. This is known as systematic longevity risk. Only schemes face systematic longevity risk. Individuals have a poor understanding of idiosyncratic longevity risk. Pension schemes can reduce idiosyncratic longevity risk by pooling the risk amongst a large number of scheme members, i.e., by taking advantage of the law of large numbers. Systematic longevity risk, however, cannot be reduced in this way: it needs to be hedged using a suitable hedging instrument
Chapter 7: Conclusion: Developing a National Narrative
Full text linkThe key lesson from our research and discussions is that we need a national narrative on pensions if we are going to build a consensus around retirement income provision. The alternative is to live in a Tower of Babel with any sensible messages drowned out by a cacophony of mixed and often contradictory signals that will just confuse the majority of pension scheme members in the retirement phase of their lives. The dream of a comfortable retirement could easily turn into a nightmare. We identify five key factors that need to make an appropriate contribution if the objective of a national consensus is to be achieved: the pensions industry itself, national media, the regulatory system, the political system, and the pension tax system (and the implications this has for the level of pension savings built up prior to retirement). We make a number of recommendations that will help support the objective
Chapter 3: Supporting savers to make the right choice at retirement for them and their family and how to build on the lessons of auto-enrolment
Full text linkWe will investigate whether it is possible to design a set of good decumulation defaults and default pathways at retirement which will be suitable for most savers, in the same way that a good default investment strategy in the accumulation phase can be designed. Even if this is possible, we accept that it is likely that more people might opt for a different retirement income plan than the estimated 10% of people who reject the default accumulation fund. For example, some retirees might be in poor health and so might choose to access their funds in full at the date of retirement – or over as short a period as possible (staggered to avoid paying unnecessary income tax). Given the complexities of retirement expenditure decision making, we will examine the support in terms of guidance, help and advice that savers need in order to make the right choices for them and their family. Building on the lessons of auto-enrolment, we will examine what nudges would be useful to move people towards making decisions that are in their best long-term interests. We will also consider the barriers, especially the regulatory barriers, to implementing a default. The overriding question that we seek to answer in this Chapter is this: Is it possible to design safe harbour retirement income plans which combine safe harbour products with financial help or guidance (that confirms the suitability of the product for the client) in order to provide retirement income journeys that are good enough for most of Middle Britain
Chapter 1: Introduction from “We Need a National Narrative: Building a Consensus around Retirement Income”, the Report of the Independent Review of Retirement Income
Full text linkThis Chapter is a scene-setter for the remainder of the Report. We begin by considering how pension schemes have traditionally been used and also how they are likely to be used in future following the introduction of the pension reforms announced in the 2014 Budget. These reforms furnish us with an opportunity to ask anew what a ‘good’ pension scheme should aim to achieve. There are also risks involved in the provision of pensions and we discuss the key ones. Unfortunately, widespread evidence shows that many if not most pension scheme members do not understand these risks and are unlikely ever to do so, however much guidance or education they receive. This will make it difficult for many of them to make informed choices about how they spend their retirement savings that takes these risks into account. This, in turn, raises the question about whether scheme members should be nudged (or even defaulted) into a well-designed decumulation product that has dealt with these risks in the most efficient and cost-effective ways possible – with the option to opt out, as in the case of auto-enrolment. We then consider the different types of pension member affected by the reforms. Finally, we discuss the attitudes of employers, consultants, providers, investment managers, and trade unions to the reforms
Correspondence from Blake Scott to Oscar E. Monnig, April 7. 1976
No full textLetter to Oscar E. Monnig from Blake Scott inviting Monnig to look at what he suspects are pieces of meteorites.April 7, 1976 Mr Oscar Monnig Dear Sir: Received your card. Was glad to hear [hear] from you. I would be good for you to come out any time and see what I believe is pieces of the large meteorite I sold you thank you for writing Blake D. Scott Blake D. Scott Rt 1 Forestburg, Texas 76239 Oscar Monnig 29 Chelsea Drive Fort Worth TX 7613
- …
