Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Budget negotiators looking at military pensions

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,361
    Likes (Received)
    212
    Thanks (Received)
    33

    Default Budget negotiators looking at military pensions

    From the article:
    The situation is far too complex to be resolved in a short-term budget deal, but if officers alone were asked to contribute 2 percent of their base pay to the retirement system, for example, it could save at least several billion dollars over 10 years.
    This doesn't seem to me like its going to take effect for new people coming into the service, my take from article is that if approved it will happen right away and will include all current officers.

    Link to article: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/1...847.html?hp=f2

    I think this is a "divide and conquer" strategy, first target officers and next year target enlisted.
    Last edited by Bunch; 12-08-2013 at 07:39 PM.
    Antes de que vengas a juzgarme por que escribo el inglÚs con errores te pregunto: Cuantos idiomas tu hablas?! Solo uno? Y vienes a juzgar mi inteligencia?! Por favor mirate en el espejo y veras en Úl reflejo la imagen clara de la estupidez...

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Rapid City, SD
    Posts
    862
    Likes (Received)
    565
    Thanks (Received)
    59

    Default Re: Budget negotiators looking at military pensions

    The point that is never made is that ALL uniform members already contribute. I think it is 6%, it is already taken off before the money is paid to members, so it is in reality "invisible" to the the service member. One point that is always brought up by the pointy headed bean counters is that 92% of those that pay in never receive a payback.
    In reality it is hard to find a retirement system so well balanced (IMO). Monthly salary (avg of high three), x number of years (20 minimum) x 2.5%. Add to that the availability of TSP. Unfortunately we (retirees) are not dying off as quickly as our predecessors (avg age 56 back in the mid 80's)
    From the Rand Corp (1997):
    For many years, the Defense Department funded military retirement on a "pay-as-you-go" basis, estimating how much money was needed to write checks for current retirees and adding that amount to the budget. This system worked well as far as paying retirees went, but it did not hold policymakers fiscally responsible for today's decisions affecting the size of the future retirement bill, e.g., increasing the force size. To promote better management, in 1984, Congress directed a switch to an accrual method of funding retirement. Under this procedure, each year the services transfer into a fund the amount necessary to pay for future retirements. The amount transferred is a percentage of the service's basic pay. Thus, if a service implements policies that affect the future value of retirement benefits, it sees the budgetary consequences of that decision immediately in the form of an increase in the amount transferred to the retirement fund. Analysis by Arroyo Center researchers William Hix and William Taylor, reported in A Policymaker's Guide to Accrual Funding of Military Retirement, suggests that the current procedures do not fully capture the intent of the legislation and that changes could eventually save the Army as much as $5-6 billion annually.
    Last edited by Chief_KO; 12-08-2013 at 08:49 PM.
    "Never force a fart in Djibouti"..."Always marry your second wife first"..."If anyone says that you're not a team player, maybe they're on the wrong team"..."You can gold plate a turd and it's still a turd"

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    1,275
    Likes (Received)
    265
    Thanks (Received)
    35

    Default Re: Budget negotiators looking at military pensions

    Quote Originally Posted by Bunch View Post
    From the article:

    This doesn't seem to me like its going to take effect for new people coming into the service, my take from article is that if approved it will happen right away and will include all current officers.
    I've read some articles on other websites (GOVEXEC for example) about this. Everything I have seen states that this sort of change would affect new accessions only. If they enact this with currently serving people, the cry will be that "We were promised..." when in fact no such promise was made. Again, glad I retired!

    Quote Originally Posted by Bunch View Post
    I think this is a "divide and conquer" strategy, first target officers and next year target enlisted.
    Could be... or it is a round about way to make those that are serving so disgusted people leave. For every person that leaves, that is one less person to process a RIF or other separation for. Similar tactics are being employed toward federal civil service.

    Also, it could be a bait and switch. Mention this blasphemy, get everyone all crazy. Then, the powers that be (TPTB) find something else to cut. But that cut is better since it is not the first option. TPTB backed off of the retirement system, so losing DECA is not so bad.

    I think the majority of the cut-cutting schemes are leaked out so TPTB can get a pulse on what would could the most anarchy.
    When things go wrong in your command, start searching for the reason in increasingly larger concentric circles around your own desk.
    -GEN Bruce C. Clarke

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    NV
    Posts
    540
    Likes (Received)
    437
    Thanks (Received)
    43

    Default Re: Budget negotiators looking at military pensions

    There will come a time when current retirees will be required to give up a "small" percentage of their pay. Don't ever believe any of that 'you'll be grandfathered' crap spouted by individual politicians or temporary political appointees.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    4,993
    Likes (Received)
    166
    Thanks (Received)
    23

    Default Re: Budget negotiators looking at military pensions

    Several billion in 10 years? Really? Thats the best place to save money right now? 10 years down the road?
    Liberalism; such great ideas, they need to force you to follow them.

    Socialism is for the people, not the socialist.

    Economic Left/Right: 7.38
    Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.08
    politicalcompass.org

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    East Coast, USA
    Posts
    123
    Likes (Received)
    26
    Thanks (Received)
    2

    Default Re: Budget negotiators looking at military pensions

    I recently attended a Town Hall meeting of the Military Compensation and Retirement Modernization Commission. According to those commission members, any changes to the retirement system will only impact any new members, not anyone currently retired. An idea being floated was changing the retirement system to where they can't collect until they're 60. A suggestion put forward by someone in the crowd was if they do that, then the govt should match TSP contributions, up to 5 percent, like they do for civil service. 'Course one of my suggestions was met with a lot of gasps from the predominantly Navy crowd. My suggestion was to change the retirement benefits to match the level of risk in one's career. For example, if you're at the pointy end of the spear, and receive combat pay on a somewhat regular basis, then you should be able to retire after 20. However, if you're someone who flys a desk, is in the rear with the gear, and has never earned a dollar of combat pay, then you don't get to retire at 20, you have to wait for 25 (or more). So someone like a CCT or PJ should be able to retire at 20, but someone who works all day in an air-conditioned room and has never set foot in a combat zone shouldn't.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Pentagon
    Posts
    42
    Likes (Received)
    19
    Thanks (Received)
    5

    Default Re: Budget negotiators looking at military pensions

    Variable minimum retirement dates might be unworkable. It'll cause problems with High Year Tenure. Logjams will form at the higher ranks and stagnate promotion rates throughout the force. TRICARE costs will rise as the force ages.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    East Coast, USA
    Posts
    123
    Likes (Received)
    26
    Thanks (Received)
    2

    Default Re: Budget negotiators looking at military pensions

    Quote Originally Posted by Cookie Monster View Post
    Variable minimum retirement dates might be unworkable. It'll cause problems with High Year Tenure. Logjams will form at the higher ranks and stagnate promotion rates throughout the force. TRICARE costs will rise as the force ages.
    The Federal govt could make just about anything work, just throw enough money at it. Oh wait, that's not working with Obamacare, lol! This can be as easy or as complicated as someone wants to make it, it's not rocket science.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •