Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits - 8/16/2011 9:29:07 AM

tazzygirl

Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline

A sweeping new plan to overhaul the Pentagon’s retirement system would give some benefits to all troops and phase out the 20-year cliff vesting system that has defined military careers for generations.

In a massive change that could affect today’s troops, the plan calls for a corporate-style benefits program that would contribute money to troops’ retirement savings account rather than the promise of a future monthly pension, according to a new proposal from an influential Pentagon advisory board.

All troops would receive the yearly retirement contributions, regardless of whether they stay for 20 years. Those contributions might amount to about 16.5 percent of a member’s annual pay and would be deposited into a mandatory version of the Thrift Savings Plan, the military’s existing 401(k)-style account that now does not include government matching contributions.
A critical new feature would adjust those contributions to give more money to troops who deploy frequently, accept hardship assignments or serve in high-demand jobs. It would also give the services a new lever to incentivize some troops to leave or stay on active duty longer.

The new proposal was unveiled July 21 by the Defense Business Board, the wellspring for many cost-saving initiatives adopted by the Defense Department in recent years. The new retirement plan would mark the biggest change in military retirement in more than 60 years and require approval from Congress.

“The current system is unfair, unaffordable and inflexible,” said Richard Spencer, a former finance executive and Marine Corps pilot who led the board’s eight-month retirement study.

This alternative plan would “enhance the ability of the service member to build a meaningful retirement asset [with] complete flexibility for their lifestyle or desires,” Spencer said.

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2011/07/military-dod-panel-calls-for-radical-retirement-overhaul-072511

For those of you who have served... or family members of the same... what say you?

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

Post #: 1

RE: Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits - 8/16/2011 9:50:59 AM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

Was just reading about this plan. For those who don't serve 20+ years it would be a positive. For those that serve 20+ it would take what was a guaranteed paycheck, presently retirees are paid a percentage of their reitrement paygrade for life, and turn it into a glorified savings account dependent on the stock market or other investments with no guarantee of life time income.

I think it needs a lot of work. The 20+ year enlisteds are the backbone of the service and we need those experienced soldiers and sailors and this plan would disincetivize staying in that long.

(in reply to tazzygirl)

Post #: 2

RE: Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits - 8/16/2011 10:04:23 AM

tazzygirl

Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline

So, in your opinion, there would no longer be an incentive to make a career of the military.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to DomKen)

Post #: 3

RE: Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits - 8/16/2011 10:40:25 AM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

So, in your opinion, there would no longer be an incentive to make a career of the military.

Less of an incentive certainly.

(in reply to tazzygirl)

Post #: 4

RE: Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits - 8/16/2011 10:43:11 AM

tazzygirl

Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline

I suppose, in my view, they are trying to run it more like a business. Putting money into a 401k plan sounds like a great idea.... until the market bottoms out.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to DomKen)

Post #: 5

RE: Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits - 8/16/2011 11:16:48 AM

Iamsemisweet

Posts: 3651
Joined: 4/9/2011
From: The Great Northwest, USA
Status: offline

This is unfortunate, but the fact is, all public retirement systems need to be reexamined, not just the military's. I don't think we can afford guaranteed benefits at any level of government any longer, and I imagine federal and state pensions will begin to look more like 401Ks than they have in the past. This is another experiment that didn't work.

_____________________________

Alice: But I don't want to go among mad people.
The Cat: Oh, you can't help that. We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad.
Alice: How do you know I'm mad?
The Cat: You must be. Or you wouldn't have come here.

(in reply to tazzygirl)

Post #: 6

RE: Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits - 8/16/2011 11:18:19 AM

willbeurdaddy

Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

Its a bad idea in the private sector, and a bad idea in the military and the rest of the public center.

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to Iamsemisweet)

Post #: 7

RE: Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits - 8/16/2011 1:22:59 PM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

Its a bad idea in the private sector, and a bad idea in the military and the rest of the public center.

If, as you claim, pensions are a bad idea and Social Security is a bad idea then how precisely should people fund retirement? 401(k)'s and the like have already been proven to do a very poor job at allowing people to retire. Are you an advocate of people working until they die?

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)

Post #: 8

RE: Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits - 8/16/2011 1:44:00 PM

rulemylife

Posts: 14614
Joined: 8/23/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

I suppose, in my view, they are trying to run it more like a business. Putting money into a 401k plan sounds like a great idea.... until the market bottoms out.

401K's were never a great idea.

They were a way for businesses to pawn off pension obligations.

The same thing that is happening here in a modified form.

(in reply to tazzygirl)

Post #: 9

RE: Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits - 8/16/2011 1:46:22 PM

willbeurdaddy

Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

Its a bad idea in the private sector, and a bad idea in the military and the rest of the public center.

If, as you claim, pensions are a bad idea and Social Security is a bad idea then how precisely should people fund retirement? 401(k)'s and the like have already been proven to do a very poor job at allowing people to retire. Are you an advocate of people working until they die?

No, I didnt say pensions were a bad idea, I said the the switch to DC plans is a bad idea. They are woefully inefficient.

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to DomKen)

Post #: 10

RE: Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits - 8/16/2011 1:47:29 PM

willbeurdaddy

Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

I suppose, in my view, they are trying to run it more like a business. Putting money into a 401k plan sounds like a great idea.... until the market bottoms out.

401K's were never a great idea.

They were a way for businesses to pawn off pension obligations.

The same thing that is happening here in a modified form.

Actually they were a way for businesses to avoid unrealistic accounting rules.

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to rulemylife)

Post #: 11

RE: Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits - 8/16/2011 1:57:43 PM

rulemylife

Posts: 14614
Joined: 8/23/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

I suppose, in my view, they are trying to run it more like a business. Putting money into a 401k plan sounds like a great idea.... until the market bottoms out.

401K's were never a great idea.

They were a way for businesses to pawn off pension obligations.

The same thing that is happening here in a modified form.

Actually they were a way for businesses to avoid unrealistic accounting rules.

Elaborate.

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)

Post #: 12

RE: Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits - 8/16/2011 2:15:48 PM

willbeurdaddy

Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

I suppose, in my view, they are trying to run it more like a business. Putting money into a 401k plan sounds like a great idea.... until the market bottoms out.

401K's were never a great idea.

They were a way for businesses to pawn off pension obligations.

The same thing that is happening here in a modified form.

Actually they were a way for businesses to avoid unrealistic accounting rules.

Elaborate.

FAS 87 forced companies to recognize pensions on the balance sheet based on current rates of interest, rather than long term investment rates of return, which is their true economic value. Pensions also became an income/expense item that resulted in fluctuations in interest rates resulting in "profits and losses" that had nothing to do with the core business' earning potential. Managing pension plans became more critical than managing the core business for many companies, wasting the time and resources of senior executives who should have been focusing on making widgets, not fighting their accountants and rating agencies over artificial "marked to market" pension liabilities.

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to rulemylife)

Post #: 13

RE: Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits - 8/16/2011 2:20:22 PM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

Its a bad idea in the private sector, and a bad idea in the military and the rest of the public center.

If, as you claim, pensions are a bad idea and Social Security is a bad idea then how precisely should people fund retirement? 401(k)'s and the like have already been proven to do a very poor job at allowing people to retire. Are you an advocate of people working until they die?

No, I didnt say pensions were a bad idea, I said the the switch to DC plans is a bad idea. They are woefully inefficient.

So the 'it' in your first post was the new plan. Makes much more sense now.

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)

Post #: 14

RE: Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits - 8/16/2011 4:25:59 PM

outhere69

Posts: 1302
Joined: 1/25/2011
Status: offline

Seems like it would be a hell of a lot more expensive to go 401k-style. There's going to be a bunch more money walking out the door, since there are a whole lot of folks who bail out with less than 20 years.

BTW, it's been mentioned many times before that the feds did away with the "old school" civil service pension back in 1987.

(in reply to DomKen)

Post #: 15

RE: Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits - 8/16/2011 4:38:06 PM

willbeurdaddy

Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: outhere69

Seems like it would be a hell of a lot more expensive to go 401k-style. There's going to be a bunch more money walking out the door, since there are a whole lot of folks who bail out with less than 20 years.

BTW, it's been mentioned many times before that the feds did away with the "old school" civil service pension back in 1987.

A 20 and out pension of 50% of pay at age 50 is extremely expensive, much moreso than any 401(k) style contribution they might make.

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to outhere69)

Post #: 16

RE: Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits - 8/16/2011 4:42:08 PM

tazzygirl

Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline

But the 401k's are riskier, no?

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)

Post #: 17

RE: Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits - 8/16/2011 4:44:36 PM

willbeurdaddy

Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

But the 401k's are riskier, no?

for the individual, no risk at all for the sponsor.

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to tazzygirl)

Post #: 18

RE: Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits - 8/16/2011 4:46:33 PM

tazzygirl

Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline

So riskier for the serviceman/woman... but not for the military.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)

Post #: 19

RE: Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits - 8/16/2011 4:47:47 PM

willbeurdaddy

Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

So riskier for the serviceman/woman... but not for the military.

Yup

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to tazzygirl)

Post #: 20

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Pentagon considering changing retirement benefits

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.107