Description: The projection methods used by the Social Security Administration's Office of the Chief Actuary are important. The resulting projections are cited regularly by policy-makers, academics and others interested in the long-term financial solvency of the OASDI system. However, a complete description of this projection methodology that is vital for serious policy discussions is not available to the general public. This summary was constructed in connection with the Social Security Advisory Board's 1999 Technical Panel on Methods and Assumptions. A goal of the Methods and Modeling working group of the Technical Panel was to 'work to ensure that the projection methods used by the Office of the Chief Actuary become more public.' From Actuarial Research Clearing House 2000, Vol. 1.

Description: This paper explores and develops some initial ideas of roll-forward reserve funding of Social Security. It reports on the work of actuarial students and teachers for an 8-week study period coordinated with the National Science Foundation program of Research Experience for Undergraduate grants. From Actuarial Research Clearing House 1994, VOL. 1.

Description: Concomitant with the industrial revolution, the function of providing old age income shifted from families and local institutions to government social security and private pension plans. The history of this change in the U.K. and U.S. is reviewed. A simple mathematical model provides insights into the role played by three rates [the rate of increase of the working population, the time preference rate, and the rate of real wage growth] in determining optimum funding policy. From Actuarial Research Clearing House 1994, Vol. 2.

Description: This paper reviews and compares the Canadian and U.S. Social Security systems as to their adequacy, actuarial equity and progressiveness. It concludes that the Canadian system[s] provide larger minimum benefits and, thus, greater adequacy than the U. S. On the other hand, the analysis indicates more emphasis on actuarial equity in the U.S. system [in total] than in Canada. Finally, both systems are shown to be highly progressive in that lower-wage earners get larger benefits per dollar of contribution than do higher wage earners. The paper concludes by noting that while the systems in these two countries have remarkably different actuarial formulae for determining benefits, and remarkably different structures, that the benefits that result from the two systems are surprisingly similar. From Actuarial Research Clearing House 1999, Vol. 1.