1. The Topic of the Month for October is "Make this the Perfect Bugout Location". Please join the discussion in the TOTM forum.

this should do wonders for our Military

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by tacmotusn, Aug 17, 2011.

  1. tacmotusn

    tacmotusn Mosquito Sailor

    (CBS News) WASHINGTON - The military retirement system has long been considered untouchable - along with Social Security and Medicare. But in these days of soaring deficits, it seems everything is a potential target for budget cutters. A Pentagon-sponsored study says military pensions are no longer untouchable - they're unaffordable.

    CBS News investigative correspondent Sharyl Attkisson reports high-level, closely-held meetings are taking place at the Pentagon regarding a radical proposal to overhaul retirement for the nation's 1.4 million service members - a bedrock guarantee of military service.

    The proposal comes from an influential panel of military advisors called the Defense Business Board. Their plan, laid out in a 24-page presentation "Modernizing the Military Retirement System," would eliminate the familiar system under which anyone who serves 20 years is eligible for retirement at half their salary. Instead, they'd get a 401k-style plan with government contributions.

    They'd have to wait until normal retirement age. It would save $250 billion dollars over 20 years.

    Douglas Holtz-Eakin, former director of the Congressional Budget Office says it's very important that the military attack its retirement issues. "We're talking about an underfunding that starts to look like hundreds of billions of dollars in the next 20 years. And if you want to maintain the core mission which is to defend the nation and have the strategic capabilities we need, we can't have all their money tied up in retirement programs."

    </POLL>Advocates say the new system would not only save money -- but would also be fairer. It would give benefits to those who serve less than 20 years. Right now, they walk away with nothing. And it would give more money to those in combat or high risk situations.

    The proposal leaves a lot of blanks to be filled in, including whether to exempt current service members so their plans won't change.

    CBS News spoke to some active duty troops who agreed costs must be cut - but worry the number of experienced soldiers will dwindle with no incentive to stay enlisted for 20 years.

    The proposal is in early stages and would require Congressional approval. But it's clear that military retirement is no longer untouchable. A Pentagon spokesman said the military retirement system "is a fair subject of review" but no changes will be made "without careful consideration."
  2. CATO

    CATO Monkey+++

    I'm always suspicious of people giving advice who don't have to participate in the policies their advice creates.
  3. beast

    beast backwoodsman

    pretty soon our military will be all foreign nationals
    a small retirement would be huge to them
    and they wont care if they are told to fire on american citizens
  4. Hispeedal2

    Hispeedal2 Nay Sayer

    I am mixed on this for several reasons. Here is a couple:

    1) I have known quite a few people that stayed simply because of retirement. They didn't want to be there, they were terrible at their job. These oxygen thieves make you lose any sort of motivation at times. After awhile, it comes down to "I'm going to do my job to the utmost of my ability regardless of the dumb-dumbs around me". To an extent, the military can be a form of welfare.

    2) The military's job ain't a corporate desk job. Humping up mountains in AFG while receiving sporadic PKM fire isn't the same as "TPS reports". How many military-types do we have here that did more than one term of service and has nice service related injuries that they now receive a check for? Why is that? The lifestyle is hard. Its brutal. In peace time, its 12 hour days and maintaining physical shape to stay in front of the 17 and 18 year olds. During wartime, its 15-20 hour days most days and up to 15 months away from family. Civilians can't contemplate 6 weeks of those sort of conditions, much less years of it. My wife snickered in church back home because some one was complaining about the 2 weeks their husband was gone. The family aspect is a whole other can of worms.

    Those are my major 2 conflicting concerns. Saving the cash seems appealing. Rolling over a "401K" after 7 or 8 years is appealing for the 2-3 term soldiers too. I would at least like to see the same protections for the TSP (that's basically what it is- just revamped) as a 401K.
    hank2222, BTPost and beast like this.
  5. BAT1

    BAT1 Cowboys know no fear

    Go ahead you Fools on the Hill, and make everyone your enemy. Watch them cut their throats.
  6. oth47

    oth47 Monkey+

    I keep hearing politicians say"everything is on the table"..maybe everything besides foreign aid,funds for the ACLU,NAACP,and a whole alphabet of governmental agencies that do nothing but suck the public tit.Get rid of the trash funding,then start talking about the "untouchable" stuff.
  7. Hispeedal2

    Hispeedal2 Nay Sayer

  8. Pyrrhus

    Pyrrhus Monkey++

    There are many who were already close to leaving (at least the Marine Corps). When the aforementioned plan started making the email rounds, a lot of us began the implementation of two-year plans to get out. It doesn't even matter if they implement it, just the thought that they will screw with it at some point is enough. This will hollow out the force. The young ones who don't yet have much invested will make the choice of whether 20 years is worth it. The older ones who have already put in 15+ years will feel like they have to stay in order to get some kind of retirement. Those who have between 8 and 12 years will flee in droves. It has already begun.
  9. Cephus

    Cephus Monkey+++ Founding Member

    I think the bean counters have left one aspect of this, they seem to want think of it as job like you have in civilian life .
    One thing wrong with that as a civilian you are not ordered to go into harms way and possibly get killed or maimed ,not even the fire dept or police dept does this ,but the military does and will continue to do so in the future .
  10. Tikka

    Tikka Monkey+++

    Half pay at 20 years.
  11. tacmotusn

    tacmotusn Mosquito Sailor

    Actually half of base pay ..... which is alot less than than what you were making on active. 1/3 at best!
  12. tulianr

    tulianr Don Quixote de la Monkey

  13. Tikka

    Tikka Monkey+++

    Excluding combat Veterans, add the medical and it is still better than industry.
    This is discriminatory; however in my opinion the War Fighters don't get enough and others get too much.

    In 1969, the Army had something called Project Transition:
    "Project TRANSITION was developed by the Department of Defense (DOD) in 1968 to provide educational and vocati onal training desi gned to increase the chances for employment of enlisted men i n civilian l i f e after separation from the service.
    As of March 31, 1969, 250 installations were participating in TRANSITION. (See app. 11.)"

    The above was a nice way of saying as your "trade" was destruction and killing; you are unemployable in the civilian world. Those that fit that definition deserve even more.
survivalmonkey SSL seal        survivalmonkey.com warrant canary