Screw The Military

[mudwhistle]

No surprise here.

The new Sec. Of Defense had proposed a new policy on military pensions.

Changing it from a 20 year retirement to a 401k type program that you can't collect till you reach retirement age. 65 years old is retirment age for 401k programs, is it not?

Strange how similar this sounds to the Bush Social Security Reform plan the Dems rejected several years ago.

Guess they don't care as much about the military as they claim.

Why doesn't the same risk exist for the military as for seniors?

This is a real head scratcher.

Wasn't the main argument against it stock-market volatility?

Correct me if I'm wrong here.

Besides, soldiers won't be able to collect their pensions for another 25 plus years with this plan.

Am I missing something here?

Why do Democrats always propose screwing the military first and foremost?

 

[California Girl]

Interesting, I made a comment on this a few weeks ago (before it got picked up) and was accused of 'fear mongering'. Funny how things work out. I guess my "secret sources" were right. Can't tell you how unsurprising that is.

 

[Intense]

I wish they would also stop fucking with the deployed Military Vote too, while we are on the subject.

 

[Leweman]

As long as every single position in government, including the President, gets the same deal first.

 

[Ravi]

As long as every single position in government, including the President, gets the same deal first.

They do.

 

[Intense]

As long as every single position in government, including the President, gets the same deal first.

They do.

Yes that, but so much more.

 

[High_Gravity]

No surprise here.

The new Sec. Of Defense had proposed a new policy on military pensions.

Changing it from a 20 year retirement to a 401k type program that you can't collect till you reach retirement age. 65 years old is retirment age for 401k programs, is it not?

Strange how similar this sounds to the Bush Social Security Reform plan the Dems rejected several years ago.

Guess they don't care as much about the military as they claim.

Why doesn't the same risk exist for the military as for seniors?

This is a real head scratcher.

Wasn't the main argument against it stock-market volatility?

Correct me if I'm wrong here.

Besides, soldiers won't be able to collect their pensions for another 25 plus years with this plan.

Am I missing something here?

Why do Democrats always propose screwing the military first and foremost?

They were actually talking about this when I was still in back in 2007.

 

[mudwhistle]

No surprise here.

The new Sec. Of Defense had proposed a new policy on military pensions.

Changing it from a 20 year retirement to a 401k type program that you can't collect till you reach retirement age. 65 years old is retirment age for 401k programs, is it not?

Strange how similar this sounds to the Bush Social Security Reform plan the Dems rejected several years ago.

Guess they don't care as much about the military as they claim.

Why doesn't the same risk exist for the military as for seniors?

This is a real head scratcher.

Wasn't the main argument against it stock-market volatility?

Correct me if I'm wrong here.

Besides, soldiers won't be able to collect their pensions for another 25 plus years with this plan.

Am I missing something here?

Why do Democrats always propose screwing the military first and foremost?

They were actually talking about this when I was still in back in 2007.

I never heard about this for the military.

Figure the odds on keeping anyone in till their 20.

Manditory retirement is 55.

By that time soldiers will be so busted up they won't be able to work.

 

[High_Gravity]

No surprise here.

The new Sec. Of Defense had proposed a new policy on military pensions.

Changing it from a 20 year retirement to a 401k type program that you can't collect till you reach retirement age. 65 years old is retirment age for 401k programs, is it not?

Strange how similar this sounds to the Bush Social Security Reform plan the Dems rejected several years ago.

Guess they don't care as much about the military as they claim.

Why doesn't the same risk exist for the military as for seniors?

This is a real head scratcher.

Wasn't the main argument against it stock-market volatility?

Correct me if I'm wrong here.

Besides, soldiers won't be able to collect their pensions for another 25 plus years with this plan.

Am I missing something here?

Why do Democrats always propose screwing the military first and foremost?

They were actually talking about this when I was still in back in 2007.

I never heard about this for the military.

Figure the odds on keeping anyone in till their 20.

Manditory retirement is 55.

By that time soldiers will be so busted up they won't be able to work.

The guys that are putting this together are only thinking about trying to save a few bucks and could care less about the Military, I truly believe if the Military burns to the ground we will all follow it.

 

[mudwhistle]

They were actually talking about this when I was still in back in 2007.

I never heard about this for the military.

Figure the odds on keeping anyone in till their 20.

Manditory retirement is 55.

By that time soldiers will be so busted up they won't be able to work.

The guys that are putting this together are only thinking about trying to save a few bucks and could care less about the Military, I truly believe if the Military burns to the ground we will all follow it.

The primary function of the Fed government is National Defense.

The Dems think it's spreading the wealth.

 

[Mr Natural]

Changing it from a 20 year retirement to a 401k type program that you can't collect till you reach retirement age. 65 years old is retirment age for 401k programs, is it not?

59 1/2 without penalty.

 

[Warrior102]

Changing it from a 20 year retirement to a 401k type program that you can't collect till you reach retirement age. 65 years old is retirment age for 401k programs, is it not?

59 1/2 without penalty.

So a guy joins at 17 (like I did), serves 20, is seperated from family for months/years, gets his ass shot (if he's lucky, he won't get killed), starts off with a base pay of $1600 a month (or whatever it is today), lives like a second class citizen in crappy base housing, stands duty, paints rocks, serves overseas on "shore duty" in places like Korea for years on end, retires at 37 - and can't touch it for another 23 years?

Wow, sign me the fuck up for that.

 

[Wiseacre]

As long as every single position in government, including the President, gets the same deal first.

Agreed.

 

[Wiseacre]

As long as every single position in government, including the President, gets the same deal first.

They do.

???? Most federal, state, and local public service pensions are defined benefits, right? They don't pay much of anything into it, if at all, which aside from healthcare benefits is one big reason why a whole lot of cities and states are going broke. That's what a lot of the fuss is all about in Wisconsin and other places, if they had 401ks this woudn't be an issue.

About the military, in times like these recruitment and retention are easy cuz there's nothing on the outside to entice people to stay out of the services. But, if and when the economy improves that could change and the armed services could start having problems keeping the brightest and best. It ain't like the pay is all that great you know.

And I'm hoping they grandfather it so the guys who are already in are not screwed over. It's not right to change the deal, which they did to those of us who joined up in the 70s. Promises were made and broken, and that ain't right.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

As long as every single position in government, including the President, gets the same deal first.

They do.

No they don't.

 

[Leweman]

As long as every single position in government, including the President, gets the same deal first.

They do.

What the hell are you talking about? The President and most government workers get a pension for LIFE after they retire and they ain't retiring at 65 I tell you that much.

 

[Ravi]

As long as every single position in government, including the President, gets the same deal first.

They do.

???? Most federal, state, and local public service pensions are defined benefits, right? They don't pay much of anything into it, if at all, which aside from healthcare benefits is one big reason why a whole lot of cities and states are going broke. That's what a lot of the fuss is all about in Wisconsin and other places, if they had 401ks this woudn't be an issue.

About the military, in times like these recruitment and retention are easy cuz there's nothing on the outside to entice people to stay out of the services. But, if and when the economy improves that could change and the armed services could start having problems keeping the brightest and best. It ain't like the pay is all that great you know.

And I'm hoping they grandfather it so the guys who are already in are not screwed over. It's not right to change the deal, which they did to those of us who joined up in the 70s. Promises were made and broken, and that ain't right.

From what I understand, government workers are enrolled in TSPs and that is what I've seen being proposed for the military.

I agree that they should grandfather it in.

 

[Leweman]

They do.

???? Most federal, state, and local public service pensions are defined benefits, right? They don't pay much of anything into it, if at all, which aside from healthcare benefits is one big reason why a whole lot of cities and states are going broke. That's what a lot of the fuss is all about in Wisconsin and other places, if they had 401ks this woudn't be an issue.

About the military, in times like these recruitment and retention are easy cuz there's nothing on the outside to ente people to stay out of the services. But, if and when the economy improves that could change and the armed services could start having problems keeping the brightest and best. It ain't like the pay is all that great you know.

And I'm hoping they grandfather it so the guys who are already in are not screwed over. It's not right to change the deal, which they did to those of us who joined up in the 70s. Promises were made and broken, and that ain't right.

From what I understand, government workers are enrolled in TSPs and that is what I've seen being proposed for the military.

I agree that they should grandfather it in.

As far as I know TSPs are more like IRA's than they are 401 K's. This is used to augment retirement income but does not count as part of a pension.

 

[High_Gravity]

I never heard about this for the military.

Figure the odds on keeping anyone in till their 20.

Manditory retirement is 55.

By that time soldiers will be so busted up they won't be able to work.

The guys that are putting this together are only thinking about trying to save a few bucks and could care less about the Military, I truly believe if the Military burns to the ground we will all follow it.

The primary function of the Fed government is National Defense.

The Dems think it's spreading the wealth.

It seems to me the guys in charge are trying desperately to ruin our Military.

 

[cootydog]

Interesting, I made a comment on this a few weeks ago (before it got picked up) and was accused of 'fear mongering'. Funny how things work out. I guess my "secret sources" were right. Can't tell you how unsurprising that is.

LMMFAO cali girl, your funny