M14 Forum

Jason0839

Some of Congress is supporting the idea of a reform of the Militairy Retirement system, the plan is gaining acceptance. If the bill is passed there will no longer be the traditional 50% retirement that the majority of look foward to and use as a justification to stay serving. Some people in congress say its not fair that we get 50%. Yet "they" receive their same exact pay after serving a minimum of four years, for life!

Please, take a few moments and write congress. I can not believe that this idea is even accepted. I can not believe that after way over 150 combat patrols, risking everything I have isnt worth a little payback to my goverment. Others have given alot more than I ever will. This proposal is a huge slap in the face and I can not even believe that such a thing was even sugested.

I love the Marine Corps, and would love to retire, but if the goverment gets rid of the current retirement for a 401k based TSP than I am out.

I dont like where we are heading, thanks you The "Honorable" Mr. Obama for even making this an acceptable option!

MemphisMachinists

Are they talking about it being retro active? Seems like a breach of comtract if so. Is it possible for non active members of military to sue? This would be a huge class action lawsuit.

I bet retention and enlistment would go way done if this passes.

Xsail

Yep, could be bad for retention but what are we doing (used to do) when we reup? Signing a new contract.

I think you are wrong about congress retirement, I looked into it a couple years ago, they fall under the same system every federal employee does. Don't keep spearding false myths, they are doing enough wrong without making up/repeating stuff! :)...O.L.

Jason0839

Xsail, if you are right thank you. But I have looked it up before too. I’ll find the exact order again. The bill won’t be retroactive to someone already retired. But yes even under a current contract you will be effected There are suggested percentages for military members at >5 years, >10, and >15 but still not good.

Poor leadership is going after the truly patriotic, what happened to our beautiful country? I’m truly saddened.

I have America the history of us on DVD, what the history channel showed last year, and it truly brings a tear to my eye to see where we are headed from how truly great the country used to be.

How can a gov try to take more away from us that serve?

Jason0839

Here is the link to the most recent article, please everyone right to your congressman.

http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/a...irement-System

jbrooks

These proposals have been around since the '80s. No changes yet.

But now that we have an all-volunteer force, most civvies look at military service as just another job, and these kinds of proposals have more of a chance to pass.

And, truth be told, a very large number of military members think of service as just another job, or maybe an educational opportunity.

The purpose of the military these days is to carry out the political objective of the "political class". And certainly almost none of the political class has served.

I guarantee if we had an EQUITABLE draft, we wouldn't be spilling American blood all over the Middle East...

Such is life. Much as we may not like it, since Viet Nam, military personnel are simply pawns of the political class.

JWB

willriskit

"Reform" is one of the most misused words in Washington and is little more than a PR gimmick. The term actually refers to returning to a previously established status quo and not to the radical alteration of an existing policy. The word "reform" (when used by politicians) is a major red flag meaning that whatever it is that they're up to has nothing to do with restoring anything.

Semper Fi!

Xsail

It may be getting more noise now in part due to the budget situation and anticipating a draw down like occured in the 90's. The typical tactic for a draw down is make life so miserable you want to leave! :) That's the way they ran me off, offered 2 duty choices that was out of the question as an incentive to drop my papers. One was to the Pentagon and had I taken those orders, I would have been there on 9-11 and it was the Navy section that was hit.

Here is a PDF on Senate/Congressional retirement. It's the same as normal civil service with minor time frame changes to be "vested"....O.L.

http://www.senate.gov/reference/reso...df/RL30631.pdf

GARRARD

I've been keeping a close eye on this as well. With 11 years in, I'd already decided to make a career out of it but if the pension gets replaced, I might just stop now. I read in the Army Times that only 15 percent of soldiers even reach twenty years. This whole mess seems very disloyal to me. Soldiers make sacrifices that most can't imagine and the ones that keep signing up for more should be compensated. It makes me sick to think that the military has to sacrifice back at home as well as in war while ATF and EPA employees get to enjoy pension benefits.

CharlieEcho

The services have become selective in that they will not accept just anyone anymore. The good thing is that our country is represented by better qualified people. I know a couple of guys that failed the entrance exam, the ASVAB. Some MOS's have waiting lists. Good now, but if these changes are enacted it may turn some away. The bad thing about being so selective is that we have a large number of kids that will never serve or contribute. Granted some should never be allowed to.

Jason0839

What hurts is the the goverment and people that we protect would even think about voicing such a thing. I truly love my Corps, but if this happends Im out, get a jop at a private security outfit that keeps head hunting me and my boys, save money and go to some exotic island for the rest of my days.

nicholst55

Here's the way this old soldier sees it; "reform" (read: gutting) the military retirement system **is** going to happen, because it is a prerequisite for "reforming" (read: gutting) social security. Under current economic conditions, the government cannot fund either one as the laws are currently written.

This all started back in the '60s when Lyndon Johnson began to "borrow" money from social security to fund his 'War on Poverty.' They called it the social security 'surplus' at the time, because that money wasn't actually being paid out. 'Oh, we're not spending this money, we're just borrowing it. We'll pay it b-a-a-a-c-c-c-k-k-k!'

Needless to say, not one nickel has ever been repaid. On the face of it, that statement about repaying the money **had** to be a lie; no legislation had been passed to generate revenue (read: taxes) to repay/replace the funds being diverted. So, how in hell was the government going to repay the money? Answer; they never had any intention of it.

In private industry or finance, they call that embezzlement. When you get right down to it, the only difference between social security and what Bernie Madoff did at ENRON is that what Madoff did was illegal. What Congress does is not, but only because they write the laws. Both were/are ponzi schemes - you pay off your old investors with the funds from new investors.

Back on the subject: anyone who believes that a 401K retirement plan is a good idea obviously doesn't watch the stock market. When the Dow drops over 700 points in one day, what does that do to your retirement?

CharlieEcho

Below is from an interview with Leon Panetta and H. Clinton, regarding the budget. Time yet to get to writting.

("A private sector advisory panel last month drafted a plan to eliminate the current system under which those who retire with 20 years of service get immediate, lifetime payments of some 50 percent of their salaries, ramping up to 87.5 percent for 35 years of service. Those with less than 20 years get nothing.

The advisory panel found that 83 percent of people who have served get nothing, and that for this budget year the government contribution to military retirement benefits will be $46 billion.

Though the report is not complete and it is non-binding at any rate, the board recommended the system be scrapped and replaced with a 401K-type defined contribution plan, grandfathering in the disabled and retirees.

"It's the kind of thing you have to consider," Panetta said. He quickly added that it must have a grandfather clause so the government does not "break faith" with the military force.")

NE450N02

I think Military retirees should get the same deal as Congress...

I think Congress should be on Social Security, same as any "Civilian".

CPTKILLER

I read the Army Times, Marine Times. & Navy Times about this at the VA waiting to see the Doc. It looks ugly. Retirement, other benefits, & Performance Pay for critical MOS's will also fade away.

This looks like the Army when the Vietnam War ended. I was a young CPT in Germany when this happened. The surprise was the West Pointers that were in the same RIF as yours truly. The only purge that was worse was when Stalin purged his officer corps just before WW2.

What will happen will be the excellent members of the service leaving, the quality of the service will deteriorate. All that will be left will be the slugs and "ticket puncher officers with no talent or leadership ability".