Panetta: 401K instead of high 3 for military...

[ABikerSailor]

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said Tuesday that overhauling the military's retirement benefits system is "the kind of thing you have to consider."

During a televised conversation at the National Defense University, Panetta said a decision has not been made yet about a proposal from a Pentagon task force that would abandon the traditional pension system in favor of a 401(k)-style contribution program.



Read more: Panetta: 'You Have to Consider' Military Retirement Reform - FoxNews.com

Panetta: 'You Have to Consider' Military Retirement Reform - FoxNews.com

Basically, this means that instead of a military person's retirement being calculated at their High 3 rate (you average the pay for the highest 3 years of pay and the member gets 50 percent of that for life).

Now, they want to put our military on a 401k program that is going to be influenced by the stock market.

Anyone remember the last crash and what it did to 401ks?

Who thinks this is a good idea to do to our military? I mean, if an E-6 is deciding whether or not to stay, one of the considerations is how much they will get when they retire. With the high 3 you can calculate that, with a 401k, it's based on what stocks do.

If they do that, the military is gonna lose a lot of mid level talent.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Wow. What a tough guy. Can't take market fluctuation.

 

[konradv]

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said Tuesday that overhauling the military's retirement benefits system is "the kind of thing you have to consider."

During a televised conversation at the National Defense University, Panetta said a decision has not been made yet about a proposal from a Pentagon task force that would abandon the traditional pension system in favor of a 401(k)-style contribution program.



Read more: Panetta: 'You Have to Consider' Military Retirement Reform - FoxNews.com

Panetta: 'You Have to Consider' Military Retirement Reform - FoxNews.com

Basically, this means that instead of a military person's retirement being calculated at their High 3 rate (you average the pay for the highest 3 years of pay and the member gets 50 percent of that for life).

Now, they want to put our military on a 401k program that is going to be influenced by the stock market.

Anyone remember the last crash and what it did to 401ks?

Who thinks this is a good idea to do to our military? I mean, if an E-6 is deciding whether or not to stay, one of the considerations is how much they will get when they retire. With the high 3 you can calculate that, with a 401k, it's based on what stocks do.

If they do that, the military is gonna lose a lot of mid level talent.

401Ks are one the worst ideas ever. They mostly help financial institutions rack up fees and companies ditch traditional pensions. The average person doesn't have the time, patience or know-how to manage one properly. That should be left in the hands of experts.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Hey.........I'm just saying that those who serve should have a pension they can COUNT ON rather than have to depend on the fluctuations of the market.

I know I like having a steady check.

 

[Full-Auto]

Anyone remember the last crash and what it did to 401ks?

Result of government meddling.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said Tuesday that overhauling the military's retirement benefits system is "the kind of thing you have to consider."

During a televised conversation at the National Defense University, Panetta said a decision has not been made yet about a proposal from a Pentagon task force that would abandon the traditional pension system in favor of a 401(k)-style contribution program.



Read more: Panetta: 'You Have to Consider' Military Retirement Reform - FoxNews.com

Panetta: 'You Have to Consider' Military Retirement Reform - FoxNews.com

Basically, this means that instead of a military person's retirement being calculated at their High 3 rate (you average the pay for the highest 3 years of pay and the member gets 50 percent of that for life).

Now, they want to put our military on a 401k program that is going to be influenced by the stock market.

Anyone remember the last crash and what it did to 401ks?

Who thinks this is a good idea to do to our military? I mean, if an E-6 is deciding whether or not to stay, one of the considerations is how much they will get when they retire. With the high 3 you can calculate that, with a 401k, it's based on what stocks do.

If they do that, the military is gonna lose a lot of mid level talent.

401Ks are one the worst ideas ever. They mostly help financial institutions rack up fees and companies ditch traditional pensions. The average person doesn't have the time, patience or know-how to manage one properly. That should be left in the hands of experts.

When you leave Mom's basement and get out into the real world you might change your mind.

 

[Modbert]

Anyone remember the last crash and what it did to 401ks?

Result of government meddling.

Goldman Sachs and numerous other companies robbing their own investors blind is a result of government meddling? Interesting.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Well, considering how shitty the pay is to begin with with. 50% of shit is still shit.

It would be a great option though.

If they did it, they would also have to have the rest of the Fed workers on the same program. Unions or not.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Well, considering how shitty the pay is to begin with with. 50% of shit is still shit.

It would be a great option though.

If they did it, they would also have to have the rest of the Fed workers on the same program. Unions or not.

Just out of curiosity, how would you set something like that up? Would you factor in a high 3 on retirement and put the money in stocks, or, are you going to tell the new recruit that they've got to start paying in as soon as they hit boot camp.

But then, that brings up the question of what happens to those that serve only 1 or 2 terms? Do they lose the 401k, or can they carry it with them into civilian life?

Personally? I think they need to keep the retirement as is.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Well, considering how shitty the pay is to begin with with. 50% of shit is still shit.

It would be a great option though.

If they did it, they would also have to have the rest of the Fed workers on the same program. Unions or not.

Just out of curiosity, how would you set something like that up? Would you factor in a high 3 on retirement and put the money in stocks, or, are you going to tell the new recruit that they've got to start paying in as soon as they hit boot camp.

But then, that brings up the question of what happens to those that serve only 1 or 2 terms? Do they lose the 401k, or can they carry it with them into civilian life?

Personally? I think they need to keep the retirement as is.

It's great to have options

It would have to start after boot. We lost so many it would be a waste of time and money setting up 401ks.

Like any 401, you can take it with you.

given choices of high 3, 401 or a mix. I'd take the mix. A lower base after 20 + whatever my 401 would be, will more than likely be far more than base high 3.

 

[old navy]

I believe the current system is sustainable. The country just needs to figure out how to fund it.

Throughout US history, but particularly during the Cold War, one huge advantage the US military (especially the Navy) had over the USSR, was a dedicated career enlisted force. The Russians had junior enlisted and officers, but no group of CPOs and SNCOs that compares to what we had.

Changing the retirement system will destroy the career force as we know it. The threat to national security will be huge. Balancing the budget at the expense of military personnel and their families is wrong.

 

[Full-Auto]

Anyone remember the last crash and what it did to 401ks?

Result of government meddling.

Goldman Sachs and numerous other companies robbing their own investors blind is a result of government meddling? Interesting.

They got into that business why?

Thanks for playing though.

 

[High_Gravity]

Why does this government keep trying to change the Military? this is the Armed Forces here, not Goldman and Sachs.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Why does this government keep trying to change the Military? this is the Armed Forces here, not Goldman and Sachs.

They won't audit the Fed, but the military is a free for all.

 

[Douger]

I believe the current system is sustainable. The country just needs to figure out how to fund it.

Throughout US history, but particularly during the Cold War, one huge advantage the US military (especially the Navy) had over the USSR, was a dedicated career enlisted force. The Russians had junior enlisted and officers, but no group of CPOs and SNCOs that compares to what we had.

Changing the retirement system will destroy the career force as we know it. The threat to national security will be huge. Balancing the budget at the expense of military personnel and their families is wrong.

What threat ? Nobody can whip raghead terrorists. Osama proved that when murkas hero sent him to train the rebels and killed Russia.Now they're killing you ( financially) No country wants to put their MILITARY up against the empires that are Russia, China, GB, and the nation formerly known as the USA and those powers know better than to fuck with each other.
You don't need a military when you have the button.

 

[WillowTree]

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said Tuesday that overhauling the military's retirement benefits system is "the kind of thing you have to consider."

During a televised conversation at the National Defense University, Panetta said a decision has not been made yet about a proposal from a Pentagon task force that would abandon the traditional pension system in favor of a 401(k)-style contribution program.



Read more: Panetta: 'You Have to Consider' Military Retirement Reform - FoxNews.com

Panetta: 'You Have to Consider' Military Retirement Reform - FoxNews.com

Basically, this means that instead of a military person's retirement being calculated at their High 3 rate (you average the pay for the highest 3 years of pay and the member gets 50 percent of that for life).

Now, they want to put our military on a 401k program that is going to be influenced by the stock market.

Anyone remember the last crash and what it did to 401ks?

Who thinks this is a good idea to do to our military? I mean, if an E-6 is deciding whether or not to stay, one of the considerations is how much they will get when they retire. With the high 3 you can calculate that, with a 401k, it's based on what stocks do.

If they do that, the military is gonna lose a lot of mid level talent.

Hey! you voted for the asshole. We've been telling you all along he wasn't for the military.

 

[Sallow]

Anyone remember the last crash and what it did to 401ks?

Result of government meddling.

Government has tons of 401ks of public employees in private firms.

Why?

That make any sense to you?

Is that Constitutional?

 

[WillowTree]

Why does this government keep trying to change the Military? this is the Armed Forces here, not Goldman and Sachs.

Hey.... didn't ya notice the dimwits in the congress??? they want to cut military spending.. got it now?????

 

[Lovebears65]

I think this will make people think twice in joining the military. This is really the only incentive for someone to join and stay in. I think if they do this a lot of people will not go in and then there will be a draft!!!! In civilian jobs you dont have to worry about going to war, leaving your family up to a year at a time.Moving every 3-4 years just to name few things these guys have to do

 

[theHawk]

How many military retire each year? I would image the number of total retirees actually goes down each year because Clinton gutted the military in the 90s and it hasn't been built back up since.