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.
I've been reading up on the new retirement system? Our current system is an annuity based system for which we get paid our retirement the day after we leave the military. They are thinking of making the retirement age the same as the civilian sector and installing a matching 401k type of system, that you wont be able to draw until 65. I think they'd match 5% of what you pay into it. I do think that the NG and reserve do get a bad deal on they're retirement. At this time in history they are deploying as much as AD and should not have to wait until 65 to draw they're benefits. So, what do you think? Good for the military, or bad?
I've been reading up on the new retirement system? Our current system is an annuity based system for which we get paid our retirement the day after we leave the military. They are thinking of making the retirement age the same as the civilian sector and installing a matching 401k type of system, that you wont be able to draw until 65.
I read it was 60.
Quote:
... I think they'd match 5% of what you pay into it.
I read that the TSP matching is for no more than 10% of your base-pay [a third of your take-home pay] and stops or matures after 5 years.
Quote:
... I do think that the NG and reserve do get a bad deal on they're retirement. At this time in history they are deploying as much as AD and should not have to wait until 65 to draw they're benefits. So, what do you think? Good for the military, or bad?
I understand that many part-timers are whining a lot about serving these days. However very few of them serve at the same level as do AD.
I had sea-duty 14 years of my 20 year career. During my sea-duty I spent 7 months on average underwater each year. I took 1 month of leave each year and the remaining 4 months each year was spent in training. The other 6 years I was stationed overseas. In two 3 year tours.
I am not aware of part-timers doing deployments to match AD.
Normally a part-timer adds his days in uniform as 'points'; and the government 'gives' them 20 years worth of points during a career of 40 years of one weekend a month and 2 weeks each summer. Any manner in which you do the math, 40 years of 12 weekends and 2 weeks, does not add up to 20 years of continuous duty. The government gives a lot to the part-timers.
Now if a reservist does extra time above that [12 weekends and 2 weeks] per year, then they are credited for the extra time. There are reservists who volunteer to be gate guards and whatnot, to spend more time in uniform, and that time counts day-for-day as if they were AD. So they can qualify for their retirement sooner.
When you go onto any reserve base, there are servicemembers in uniform guarding the gates and doing maintenance. Those guys are reservists who have volunteered to get extra time in uniform. My Dw works in a commissary on a reserve base, I go there routinely.
I see this new plan as helping the reservists a bit, and giving an ear to the many servicemembers who only serve 10 years.
But then it really screws AD who serve a continuous 20 or 30 years.
We have heard scuttlebut that with this new plan retirees will lose their ID cards. So the biggest portion of benefits goes away.
With the tens of trillions of US debt,70% run up under the last 3 Repubic presidents-
it is inevitable that the US will reneg on ALL pension schemes to include SS and Military pensions.
They have been chipping away at the military retirement and health care system for quite some time now. I am lucky in that I originally came in before Sep '80 and am grandfathered into the original system. Eventually I will draw a reserve component pension at age 60 which is enhanced only by the fact that during my carrer I served eleven years on active duty, hence more total points. It is important for some to understand that the system is set up in such a way to prevent former active duty members now in the guard/reserve from accruing extra duty active service points to reach what would be the equivalent of twenty years active service, hence retiring before age 60. Another fact that has surprised many who came back into the reserve/guard is that back in the early 90s if they took a one time separation bonus leaving active duty, the amount you got will be recouped from your reserve/guard pension after age 60. So, on one hand certain service members get pretty good incentives to enlist or re enlist while others ironically get penalized. The attempt to reduce reserve retirements to age 55 is pretty much a dead issue. As one poster correctly surmised, the initial and extended costs are the barrier to any enhancements and judging by the current fiscal mess we are in meeting existing obligations to service members will be stressed as the years go on.
I think that plan would hurt enlistment. I thin it's bad for military. Get paid at 65 and die at 70...grrrrrrrr
18 year olds have stars in their eyes and think they are bullet-proof.
No 18 yo considers what life will look like when he is 40.
A 20 year retiree is:
1. very fortunate to have missed the bullet for so long. He is a 2 inch thick medical record, scars, old broken bones, torn ligaments, aches and pains. Most of his buddies got out long ago with medical problems. He is lucky to still be walking without a walker or cane.
2. He has been rode very hard and put away wet continuously for decades.
3. He has 24 months before his life expectancy expires. If he is still going after an additional 3 years, he has completely beaten the odds, and outlived his comrades.
I do not see waiting another 2 decades for a pension.
The Army Times has had several articles about the revamping of the retirement system. It has some good points but everyone already in the military is grandfathered under the current system. Its an interesting read.
Forest beekeeper you are so right. I know from my experience when I first came in retirement issues and benefits were basically a non issue. Now at age 47 being in the reserve component and facing another deployment both my body and mind have been altered quite a bit. The reserve component with it's older members pulling in many cases the identical duties of their much younger active duty counterparts is being worn out. Unlike being 20 on active duty the reservist/guardsman also has the burden of putting their fulltime civilian careers and finances on hold. I am not complaining and by volunteering to come back in after an extended break in service I understood the sacrifices. In the decades to come it will be very interesting to see what the impact and outcome on the current troops of OIF/OEF will be. We already know what the long term financial impact will be.
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.
Army Time Overhaul retirement system link
