New retirement proposal bad for grads?

Yes indeed... the government will take good care of its servicemen.
And why shouldn't officers be guaranteed 20 yrs. If they do their job? Many of you know better than I... the moves, the deployments, the missed milestones with family, and indeed, the danger .

Being able to serve is a privilege, not an entitlement.

If officers should be guaranteed 20 years if they do their job, the military should be able to deny resignation and retirement requests. It is what it is, this discussion is not about being fair to individual, rather the best way to manage the current military personnel system (I am not saying the current military personnel system is good).

If we take the concept, one step further, everyone should get promoted if they do their job.
 
Yes indeed... the government will take good care of its servicemen.
And why shouldn't officers be guaranteed 20 yrs. If they do their job? Many of you know better than I... the moves, the deployments, the missed milestones with family, and indeed, the danger .

Being able to serve is a privilege, not an entitlement.

If officers should be guaranteed 20 years if they do their job, the military should be able to deny resignation and retirement requests. It is what it is, this discussion is not about being fair to individual, rather the best way to manage the current military personnel system (I am not saying the current military personnel system is good).

If we take the concept, one step further, everyone should get promoted if they do their job.

All this talk about being able to serve is a privilege... hogwash. It is an honor. The hard working, dedicated servicemen and women earn every penny.

Some of you talk like management eager to reduce the payroll. That sounds like axes to grind, or even jealousy to me.

That's just my opinion, and many of you have different ones.
 
It's a job. And the only people who immediate equate that service to some holier-than-thou experience are people who haven't served.

Certainly it was an honor to serve. Certainly you feel like you're making a difference and "giving back." And for that, you see the world and you're paid.

You get paid to do the job... That salary is what you're owed.
 
All this talk about being able to serve is a privilege... hogwash. It is an honor. The hard working, dedicated servicemen and women earn every penny.

Some of you talk like management eager to reduce the payroll. That sounds like axes to grind, or even jealousy to me.

That's just my opinion, and many of you have different ones.

An undeniable fact is that not everyone can serve in the military, regardless of their personal desire.

I was only addressing the service aspect, not compensation.

It is what it is, likely it or not, someone has to make hard decisions or express an opinion about those hard decisions. If you think I have "axes to grind," my previous posting will show that I don't - I made my choices and things worked out pretty good for me.
 
I'm not sure if anyone here has had an ax to grind. I certainly don't. I appreciated my time in the Coast Guard. I like my life outside. I tried to save, I had my IRAs while I was in, but once I got out I was able to take advantage of employer-matched 401(k) and I've saved far more for retirement since I got out. I never thought "I'll have retirement at 20 years to rely on."
 
Some of you talk like management eager to reduce the payroll.
I find this statement a little shocking. The military has a budget just like Apple or any company. Part of that budget is payroll and benefits.

The DoD is dealing with sequestration that will last for many more years to come. They have to find savings somewhere. The easiest way is to attack the payroll/benefits aspect.
~ Not to divert, but look at how companies are changing the way they do new hires. Many are being brought in at lower hours so the company does not have to cover them with health insurance.

I think we see officers differently, especially when they get to the O4 marker. It would be considered high mid-level management. Could Microsoft promote everyone for just doing their job from entry level management to mid level, or mid to senior and be financially viable? The difference in pay between an O3 over 10 and an O4 over 10 is @700 bucks a month. That is before we even discuss BAH, which is not taxable, the difference between an O3 and O4 at Quantico is @225 a month, and that is not the biggest jumps. In total 12K a year per O4 promoted just because they did their job and hit their time marker with the military. Multiply that by tens of thousands service members.

As LITS, stated you get paid to do a job. That salary is what you are owed. Nobody in my mind enters to make a million plus flight pay. My DH and now DS say I can't believe they pay me to do this!

No axe to grind here either. We loved every single minute of our 21 years. Every tour, including places like Mt. Home, ID....hub of Elmore county, pop. 10K. and OMG no Alamorgdo, topped off with places like Fayettenam, and Goldsboro....getting the drift that this Jersey girl spent the majority of her life in places that most people would only visit if they had too, but I cried as we pulled out of the driveway on our way to a new home.

Retirement pay was never an aspect of the equation. Obviously, our DS that is an O2 now, loved the life too, or he would not be serving today, again no axe here.
~ This is a kid that has either been an AF dependent or now an ADAF officer his entire life.
~ My DD is a teacher, her top choice for teaching was DOD in Europe. I think that would classify as her loving the life too.

Finally, I have to ask this question. Do you believe we need SS reform? If so, what would be the target year group you would hit for the change? Now, if you say 55, that basically would be inline with the military saying that anyone that is an O4 or O4 select would keep the current retirement system.
~ 45 would be the equivalent in this scenario because they would be 20 years out from retirement if they were able to stay.

I am not saying that this would not have been on the table if sequestration did not occur, but I believe it got on the table because it did.
 
Some of you talk like management eager to reduce the payroll.
I find this statement a little shocking. The military has a budget just like Apple or any company. Part of that budget is payroll and benefits.

The DoD is dealing with sequestration that will last for many more years to come. They have to find savings somewhere. The easiest way is to attack the payroll/benefits aspect.
~ Not to divert, but look at how companies are changing the way they do new hires. Many are being brought in at lower hours so the company does not have to cover them with health insurance.

I think we see officers differently, especially when they get to the O4 marker. It would be considered high mid-level management. Could Microsoft promote everyone for just doing their job from entry level management to mid level, or mid to senior and be financially viable? The difference in pay between an O3 over 10 and an O4 over 10 is @700 bucks a month. That is before we even discuss BAH, which is not taxable, the difference between an O3 and O4 at Quantico is @225 a month, and that is not the biggest jumps. In total 12K a year per O4 promoted just because they did their job and hit their time marker with the military. Multiply that by tens of thousands service members.

As LITS, stated you get paid to do a job.

You lost me when you quoted LITS.
;-)

You are right, we look at things differently. I would prefer that our servicemen get more benefits while reducing the gross waste of money in the government.

As for overhauling SS, no. I believe that the eldest in our society have carried this nation on their backs forever, and deserve the meager monthly payment. My father worked his entire life without being able to save much. Now he is 85 and collects about $1500 per month. Anything that could endanger that is a no no.

Of course SS is headed toward a shortfall, but there are better ways to eliminate government expenditures and strengthen it than by depriving the elderly and negating the expectations of a continued retirement pension for military personnel that are already serving.

My opinion. And, thank you for all of your sacrifices as a military family. Hopefully there have been many ups as well!
 
Maplerock,
I had a crap day at work, but you made me laugh.
Thank you

I would prefer that our servicemen get more benefits while reducing the gross waste of money in the government.

Bullet retired at 43. At the age of 83 he will be at 2 Million.
~ Please check out DFAS. An O1 base pay is 36K a year..O5 is 100K. 20 years
Just saying as life expectancy grows, so does the debt.

My father in law also plays that game of measly monthly SS. He too is 83. The thing is from an economical aspect, at their age now everything they paid in, is gone. It is now us, as their children paying. Our children will be paying our SS, because it is insolvent.
I get your intention, but the DoD is saying we won't be like SS.
 
Last edited:
for what its worth to anyone - retired ARNG Officer with another 2+ years before collecting my "generous" retirement; didn't join the military expecting to get rich or life a luxurious old age on the governments dime, I am grateful for what I will receive and will be much better off than most civilians my age. The new 401 style program makes infinite sense for those who don't stay 20 years and helps compensate them for their service, and in the way of a reality check the country is flat broke and DOD budgets are shrinking so further cuts to retirement and healthcare are inevitable, deal with it.
 
The corporate world went through this exercise over the past 15-20 years. Time DoD caught up. The new plans have pros and cons. Everyone's opinion will differ as there is no right answer.

Pretty sure it has been more than 15-20 years. Since then corporate executive pay has increased substantially. Regardless of the performance of the company.

And, yes, I am a registered republican.
 
"A Veteran is someone who at one point in his/her life, wrote a blank check made payable to the United States of America for an amount of 'Up to and including my life'" They deserve everything they get and more.
 
"A Veteran is someone who at one point in his/her life, wrote a blank check made payable to the United States of America for an amount of 'Up to and including my life'" They deserve everything they get and more.


But they don't. And they also never signed a blank check.
 
They and you did when they and you said "I Do". Don't think the corporate world takes it that seriously.
 
I think I took the same oath as federal employees.

I did my job and I got paid. That's what I signed up for and what the government agreed to do.

Veterans aren't served by the current system... Only the small segment of the veteran population known as retirees gets anything from it.

The military is a dinosaur in this department, and many other departments. It's FAR behind.
 
LITS,
As a "useful sentinel of our laws," you placed yourself in harm's way more than the average federal employee. I think that aspect of your service is what we consider as a "blank check" and it is very much appreciated. So we agree to disagree on this. :thumb:
 
LITS,
As a "useful sentinel of our laws," you placed yourself in harm's way more than the average federal employee. I think that aspect of your service is what we consider as a "blank check" and it is very much appreciated. So we agree to disagree on this. :thumb:

The the thing is, if you believe that, and believe the current system works, then we must conclude that a service member who separated from a service after 19 years has not earned the same things as someone who retired at 20.

I don't buy that.

So the current system is broken, and it hurts anyone who served 1 day to 19 years 364 days 59 minutes 59 seconds.
 
LITS,
I totally agree with you on the current system. It needs to be updated so that there is not a 20 year cliff to vesting. I know too many vets who wanted to serve 20 and due to the "needs of the service" were downsized out before they could earn that pension.
 
Yes indeed... the government will take good care of its servicemen.
And why shouldn't officers be guaranteed 20 yrs. If they do their job? Many of you know better than I... the moves, the deployments, the missed milestones with family, and indeed, the danger .

Being able to serve is a privilege, not an entitlement.

If officers should be guaranteed 20 years if they do their job, the military should be able to deny resignation and retirement requests. It is what it is, this discussion is not about being fair to individual, rather the best way to manage the current military personnel system (I am not saying the current military personnel system is good).

If we take the concept, one step further, everyone should get promoted if they do their job.


My son is seeking an appointment to either USAFA, USMA or USNA. He wants the opportunity to serve, and is patriotic to the core. I am sure that when he begins his service, like most academy graduates, he will consider it a "privilege" and an honor to serve his country, particularly as an officer. And I agree that there are many people who would love to be an officer in our armed forces. Having said that, I do not consider military officers to be "Privileged". Each and every benefit they receive is earned, whether they serve in a combat area or not.

I am a state judge in a rural Midwest state, and enjoy a relatively trouble-free and comfortable life, even if not rich or completely without stress. I have enjoyed the "privilege" to live this life because of our Constitution, and because we have always had very capable soldiers and officers protecting that Constitution and our way of life.

Our sons and daughters who serve as officers after graduating from academies or ROTC programs do not need to be treated extra special, nor are they entitled to special "privileges" or accolades, but they certainly should not be categorized as "privileged" either.

My son has twice the abilities and drive I ever had. Like most of your children, he has been a stellar student, athlete, and class leader. He is capable of achieving anything that I have and more. He could attend virtually any college he cares too, perhaps with the exception of a few. Yet something is driving him to the academies and becoming an officer. Although the officer pay in the military is not too bad, almost all kids who are admitted to a service academy could make more if they took a more conventional path.

The retirement changes are what they are, and I suspect that no officer candidate will change his or her mind about serving based on the changes. But at the same time, the policy makers need to consider that most of those who serve are quality people, and are more than worthy of benefits which are commensurate with their high skill and capabilities.
 
Back
Top