RE: Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits

RE: Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

tazzygirl -> RE: Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits (8/16/2011 4:56:43 PM)
Sad. These men and women promise their lives... and get this shit.

BamaD -> RE: Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits (8/16/2011 4:57:47 PM)
Here is a problem with the plan that no one I have seen has mentioned. An airman who is married with one kid qualifies for food stamps. Where will he get the money to contribute? If they run it like one version of the GI bill if they can't afford it in basic the can't get in later. If they contribute this amounts to a cut in pay few in the military can afford a 16% cut. When evaluating pay they don't take into account things like frequent moves, compensation for which usually ran about 1000 dollars short of actual expenses when I was in. This ends up shafting the military once again.

BamaD -> RE: Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits (8/16/2011 4:58:54 PM)
The whole thing in a nutshell. well said!

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits (8/16/2011 5:09:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD Here is a problem with the plan that no one I have seen has mentioned. An airman who is married with one kid qualifies for food stamps. Where will he get the money to contribute? If they run it like one version of the GI bill if they can't afford it in basic the can't get in later. If they contribute this amounts to a cut in pay few in the military can afford a 16% cut. When evaluating pay they don't take into account things like frequent moves, compensation for which usually ran about 1000 dollars short of actual expenses when I was in. This ends up shafting the military once again. If it ever passed it wouldnt require contributions from the soldiers.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits (8/16/2011 5:11:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Sad. These men and women promise their lives... and get this shit. Its unlikley to happen unless all Federal workers retirements were changed, which really aint gonna happen.

tazzygirl -> RE: Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits (8/16/2011 5:15:50 PM)
Ya know, the rest can fight for themselves. But the military? Its just something I cant agree with.

outhere69 -> RE: Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits (8/16/2011 7:32:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Sad. These men and women promise their lives... and get this shit. Its unlikley to happen unless all Federal workers retirements were changed, which really aint gonna happen. How do you figure? Feds use the TSP just like the proposal, and part is matched. BTW, willbe, a lt col would get around $45000 if it's based on basic pay and 3 years at that rank, according to the DoD pay scales. I can't see how the enlisted dudes in particular could participate for awhile, and they wouldn't get much of a pension. Master sergeants would get a bit under 30k under the existing plan. So, consider the guys that would pull down similar money after 18 years of service, compared to no pension at all. That's still a shitload of money. It was awhile before I could afford to contribute to a 401k, as a blue collar worker. I can't see how the enlisted dudes in particular could participate for awhile, and they wouldn't get much of a pension anyway. Master sergeants would get a bit under 30k under the existing plan.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits (8/16/2011 7:40:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: outhere69 quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Sad. These men and women promise their lives... and get this shit. Its unlikley to happen unless all Federal workers retirements were changed, which really aint gonna happen. How do you figure? Feds use the TSP just like the proposal, and part is matched. The TSP is a minor part of the FERS, the core benefit is still the defined benefit plan. Also you are not required to contribute to TSP, there is an automatic 1% contribution on your behalf. You can elect to contribute more of which part is matched.

Termyn8or -> RE: Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits (8/17/2011 12:10:55 AM)
FR Why don't they fuck around with THEIR OWN GODDAMN RETIREMENT ? T^T

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits (8/17/2011 9:45:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: outhere69 quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Sad. These men and women promise their lives... and get this shit. Its unlikley to happen unless all Federal workers retirements were changed, which really aint gonna happen. How do you figure? Feds use the TSP just like the proposal, and part is matched. BTW, willbe, a lt col would get around $45000 if it's based on basic pay and 3 years at that rank, according to the DoD pay scales. I can't see how the enlisted dudes in particular could participate for awhile, and they wouldn't get much of a pension. Master sergeants would get a bit under 30k under the existing plan. So, consider the guys that would pull down similar money after 18 years of service, compared to no pension at all. That's still a shitload of money. It was awhile before I could afford to contribute to a 401k, as a blue collar worker. I can't see how the enlisted dudes in particular could participate for awhile, and they wouldn't get much of a pension anyway. Master sergeants would get a bit under 30k under the existing plan. I think I responded before your edit. First, I think its wrong to characterize what the Pentagon is proposing as a "401(k) plan". They are not proposing that contributions would be required. The problem is that youve got three different classes of "employees" in the military. Youve got the guys who enlist and never re-up. They dont get much out of any retirement plan. Then youve got the guys who stay in the service to build a resume transferable to the private sector, and are in for 5-10 years. They would benefit more from a defined contribution plan like is being proposed, and then youve got the career soldiers who benefit far more from the current retirement plan. Because the career soldier is far more prevalent than career employees in one company are these days, replacing their benefits with a defined contribution plan is a terrible idea. In fact, Im not sure that its not just posturing. If the defense budget comes under the kind of pressure that it might from the Gang of 12 this kind of proposal might be to highlight that you cant do it on the backs of career soldiers. You have to reduce the size of the entire military, and bring down the costs of the current structure, not change the structure.

outhere69 -> RE: Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits (8/17/2011 6:36:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: outhere69 quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Sad. These men and women promise their lives... and get this shit. Its unlikley to happen unless all Federal workers retirements were changed, which really aint gonna happen. How do you figure? Feds use the TSP just like the proposal, and part is matched. The TSP is a minor part of the FERS, the core benefit is still the defined benefit plan. Also you are not required to contribute to TSP, there is an automatic 1% contribution on your behalf. You can elect to contribute more of which part is matched. Willbe, the defined benefit plan is 0.01(years of service)(average of 3 highest year's earnings). Truely a vast sum compared to TSP contributions. And how far do you think 1% contribution into TSP would get you? You'd have to be nuts to retire with funds from such a small stash. The folks I went to school with around here were stashing more like 10-13%.

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875