Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It would be interesting to hear from military retirees if they would have been affected positively or negatively by a new retirement system had it been in place when they served.
I ended up staying on continuous active duty for 22+ years.
I retired in 1990.
I have no clue what my benefits could have been back then, if they were different.
I have drawn $800,000+ dollars in retirement pay.
All of my and my wife's major medical expenses have been taken care of.
I retired at that point because my obligations were complete. I declined promotion because of a very good job offer. I continued to work as an independent contractor for 10+ years. My military experience definitely led the way to a higher pay. I quit working because my wife wanted to stay in her career and she was offered a paid relocation and promotion. I got tired of the 3,800 mile commute to my job, so I quit and retired at age 51...
To the question: Are military retirement benefits unfair? My answer is, the military retirement benefits I have received were fair. There were some difficult times and good times. I can see why some decided to leave the service. Some soldiers I served with suffered greatly, some paid the ultimate price.
For those who are upset that someone can be in for 10 or 15 years and end up with absolutely nothing(and I agree with you), you should be happy with the new retirement system that is being implemented. The Blended Retirement System. http://militarypay.defense.gov/BlendedRetirement/
Basically they are getting rid of the old High 3 and replacing it with the new one. During calendar year 2018, service members will have to decide whether they want the High 3 or the BRS.
The BRS is much like a pension in the civilian world. The government will automatically place 1% of your base pay into the service members Thrift Savings Plan. Service members can also place and additional 4 percent that the government will match. For a total of 9 percent.
Service members can also add whatever additional percentage they want from their pay. Only this wont be matched by the government.
It would be interesting to hear from military retirees if they would have been affected positively or negatively by a new retirement system had it been in place when they served.
I signed a delayed-enlistment contract in 1976 and I went Active in 1977. I served 6 years and got out in 1983. After 4 years of college, in 1987 I re-enlisted and served another 14 years. In 2001 I reached my High-Year-Tenure date and I was forced out, onto pension.
I do not know if the new system would have benefited me.
In 1987 I decided that I was going to stay in for the retirement. That year we began focusing on that retirement plan. We were frugal and we invested. My retirement was not unexpected. For most of my fellows, their retirement hit them by surprise.
That 14 years was long enough for us to invest so we could live comfortably on my pension.
The healthcare benefit is worth a lot more than the pension itself.
Your statement begs the question. What amount, or system, to your mind, IS enough?
Had you read through the thread you would know how I feel and what I think should be done.Yes I feel there should be something for everyone ,like if you leave before ten years you get separation pay(or something of that nature) but for the career members of the Military who retire as I said before ,full last year of service salary and health care for their life and spouse.Why not offer both ,the savings program and my suggestion,this way everyone gets something.
Had you read through the thread you would know how I feel and what I think should be done.Yes I feel there should be something for everyone ,like if you leave before ten years you get separation pay(or something of that nature) but for the career members of the Military who retire as I said before ,full last year of service salary and health care for their life and spouse.Why not offer both ,the savings program and my suggestion,this way everyone gets something.
My apologies. I did read the entire thread and I did look for your responses. What you're suggesting was there in post #210.
It was, however, buried in a wall of text, so I must have skipped right past in on the first few tries. I bolded it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by G1..
I have been trying to follow you and I just can't. To me you blame the DoD for everything and from what I have seen and heard that if you are a good soldier and want to stay for 20 years as long as you do your job you can.The Commandant of the Marine Corp is trying something or should I say wants to try lets say after 10 years you get 50% medical ,15 years 75% and coverage for a spouse....,something of that nature or like that.What this thread was about were people who think that military retirement benefits were unfair and to treat the men and women like they do on the outside of the Military and that's plain BS.
People joined the Military for a bunch of different reasons,some for education,others for leadership,some to figure out in life what they wanted to do others were sent into the Military by the courts and finally people my age were sent into the Military because their numbers were up. (the draft).I know people who went to different Academy's but not one...no one I know went into it thinking about retirement.To me it's simple,whatever your last year salary ,you get that and medical the rest of your and your spouse's life,end of story and it is still not enough in my opinion.Don't give me this I was sent here or there and I did this and you didn't ****.Everyone in the Military deserves it all four branches.
...To me it's simple,whatever your last year salary ,you get that and medical the rest of your and your spouse's life, end of story and it is still not enough in my opinion.
A military pension IS NOT your last year salary.
It is based on your last base-pay.
If you served for 20 years then you get 50% of your last base-pay.
If you served for 20 years then you get 50% of your last base-pay.
I'm interpreting G1's statement as it should be 100% of last base pay. There's not enough meat on that proposal to understand it. 100% at 20 years? 100% at 30? 100% at 40? What about those who get separated against their will?
'It's not enough' is simplistic. In some cases, the current or proposed system probably *is* enough.
My service was tough and I deployed several times-but I walked away without any serious disability or trauma, able to work. For me, retiring fully, with 100% of my salary, in my 40s would have been a little ridiculous.
I *love* the matching funds in the new retirement plan. That really incents people to save. Yes, you'll get some service member who doesn't see the benefit and doesn't max it, or whose individual circumstances (personal issue, divorce, etc.) prevent it-but the lowered pension is still there as a safety net for that guy/girl.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
