The Water Cooler

BOL message board for off-topic posts

Boards ▾

BOL Round Table

The No. 1 'Bama fan community on the Internet

The Water Cooler

BOL message board for off-topic posts

The Tailgate

Tailgating, recipes, cooking, food & drink

Ticket Exchange

Buy, sell or swap tickets

Reply

OT: Military Retirement Changing....For the Worse

  • For those who are paying attention, we have seen from Greece what the failure to make sacrifice can and likely will mean. We will all be affected, likely in means testing for SS or another bump back in age eligibility but change MUST be made. It will be painful for EvERYONE. That being said, military should be the last cut, not the first. You can thank the democratic party for that.

  • Bamajoe34 said... (original post)

    wasn't trying to win, I knew very early on you served. I know for a fact there is pleanty of other areas to cut that you could leave the retirement alone. Sorry if I rained on your debate parade you were enjoying because I sure wasn't enjoying it. I was very suprised when I opened this thread for the first time at what I read. I thought libs and cons alike would be against this. It got my blood boiling a little bit which doesn't happen on here for me too much, bottom line to me is that I have buried too many of my own soldiers and even more friends that gave all to listen to anyone say that what soldiers do does not warrant them recieving a pension that they contribute to for x number of years. The word you used that made me really mad was ludicrous. How can you say that if you truly served? I got hurt and I am a disabled vet. I deal every day with pain and limitations due to me getting hurt. No, it wasn't in combat but I still gave and I deserve what I get. I was half way to that retirement and yes if I made it I would have deserved it just for missing my kids grow up if for nothing else.

    As for your guilt trip about the family of the fallen Capt. It may be precieved as harsh I get that. God Bless his family I pray that God comforts them in this time of need. I posted it as a reminder of what these guys are faced with day and night. They don't ask for much and they don't get much as a whole yet you want to take more from them when they give more than any of us.

    Umm, I don't think I ever said military members getting pensions is"ludicrous". Quote me if I did. I'm saying it's unsustainable to keep gov't pension levels where they're sitting now. Paying out 40 years of retirement is helping bankrupt our country. I don't like the idea of the military cutting back, but it's necessary. Just as necessary as cutting back every other facet of our gov't.
    I appreciate your service, I truly do. And I'm sorry to hear you're disabled. I know that can't be easy. One area of our gov't that needs MORE funding is the VA Medical services. But pensions for perfectly healthy 40 year old retirees need to be trimmed down. That's all I'm saying.

    signature image signature image signature image
  • As a Capt in the USAF, I agree that there does need to be trimming in the government, and even in the military. Government contracts to civilian companies are way overdone, and the weapon system under contract hasn't been complete in more than a decade. The F-22 was a concept conceived in the '80s and is just now coming online and is now indefinately grounded, which has again cost the DoD millions of more dollars. Fact of the matter is that the government should have been modernizing its weapons way before it actually started to, but companies want more money, so they push back modernization projects even more. Instead of wasting $1.3 billion on fuel every year the government should have started looking into bio-fules ten years ago instead of the past 5 years. The USAF alone just completedy testing every aircraft in the inventory to see if they were bio-fuel capable, but won't completely rely on alternate fuels for another 15 years.

    The US military is the most inventive body in the world, yet we can't help but step on our own foot and waste more money that any company in the world.

    Lastly, I'll part with this. Instead of allowing Generals and Colonels that are under investigation retire because they abused their power with unprofessional relationships or fraud is another way the service have been throwing away money for decades and shows that they'd rather throw money at the problem instead of doing something proactive about it in the long run. RTR.

  • Salary of the US President ..................$400,000
    Salary of retired US Presidents ............$180,000
    Salary of House/Senate ......................$174,000
    Salary of Speaker of the House ...........$223,500
    Salary of Majority/Minority Leaders ......$193,400
    ...Average Salary of Soldier DEPLOYED IN IRAQ/AFGHANISTAN $38,000

  • This post is for members of BamaOnLine only. Join now! Start Free Trial
  • BigBubbaFloyd said... (original post)

    Easy to say when it does not affect you. The government should pay for the service of it members. Military retirement is not bankrupting the government.

    I agree that the government should honor its commitment to current members but the pension plan needs to be changed on a going forward basis for future military service.

    I concur with all the patriotic implications about current military members but this is what some people are ignoring: We are borrowing to to the tune of $1 trillion per year. Nearly 50% of the what we pay out each year is borrowed money. It cannot be sustained.

    So here's the thing. Expenses MUST be cut and even that woj't be enough. It's likely that taxes must be raised.

    Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, DOD, unemployment benefits, welfare, and interest on the debt comprised over 80 percent of all government spending in 2010. That leaves less than 20% to fund everything else government spends.

    If you cut out that 20% ---every penny-----you'd still need to cut expenses and raise taxes to make up for the 30% balance that we are currently borrowing and that amount will only sustain the current debt level (the balance will not be paid down).

    SS, medicare, medicaid,MUST be trimmed subtantially across the board. AND/OR taxes raised drastically. Please inform me if there are other options. We will be cutting benefits to the poor and elderly. It's not "if" but "when".

    No one can reasonably argue that pensions for future military members should be off the table. That is ludicrous and unworkable.

    This post was edited by bamacharm 3 years ago

  • aftider97 said... (original post)

    As a Capt in the USAF, I agree that there does need to be trimming in the government, and even in the military. Government contracts to civilian companies are way overdone, and the weapon system under contract hasn't been complete in more than a decade. The F-22 was a concept conceived in the '80s and is just now coming online and is now indefinately grounded, which has again cost the DoD millions of more dollars. Fact of the matter is that the government should have been modernizing its weapons way before it actually started to, but companies want more money, so they push back modernization projects even more. Instead of wasting $1.3 billion on fuel every year the government should have started looking into bio-fules ten years ago instead of the past 5 years. The USAF alone just completedy testing every aircraft in the inventory to see if they were bio-fuel capable, but won't completely rely on alternate fuels for another 15 years.

    The US military is the most inventive body in the world, yet we can't help but step on our own foot and waste more money that any company in the world.

    Lastly, I'll part with this. Instead of allowing Generals and Colonels that are under investigation retire because they abused their power with unprofessional relationships or fraud is another way the service have been throwing away money for decades and shows that they'd rather throw money at the problem instead of doing something proactive about it in the long run. RTR.

    Attaboy Cap'n. Bring it on home. And thank you for your service.

    This post is proof positive that being blind to what is wrong with the defense budget is not a prerequisite to being a loyal patriotic American.

    The President needs to deep select this soldier to the top of the AF food chain and let him begin to fix the things he sees that are wrong.

    If there were zero waste, fraud, stupidity and incompetence in military procurement we might not even need to cut any programs, anywhere.

    President Eisenhower warned us fifty years ago about the things the Captain is talking about.

    Being anti waste and fraud in the military is not being anti-military. Quite the contrary.

    RTR

  • BamaFanB4u said... (original post)

    Salary of the US President ..................$400,000 Salary of retired US Presidents ............$180,000 Salary of House/Senate ......................$174,000 Salary of Speaker of the House ...........$223,500 Salary of Majority/Minority Leaders ......$193,400 ...Average Salary of Soldier DEPLOYED IN IRAQ/AFGHANISTAN $38,000

    Number of US Presidents: 1
    Number in House and Senate: 535
    Number of members of our military, active and reserve: More than 2.2 million (as of May 2009).

    signature image signature image signature image
  • This post is for members of BamaOnLine only. Join now! Start Free Trial
    signature image signature image signature image

    Ronald Reagan: Man is not free unless government is limited.

  • This post is for members of BamaOnLine only. Join now! Start Free Trial
    signature image signature image signature image

    Ronald Reagan: Man is not free unless government is limited.

  • Bamajoe34 said... (original post)

    A soldier with ties to north Alabama has been killed. According to the U.S. Army, National Guard Captain Wade Ramsey died on August 4th.

    Details are still coming in, but WHNT NEWS 19 has learned Captain Ramsey's father, Perry Ramsey, lives in Arab. His mother, Charlotte Tarwater, lives in Birmingham.

    We're working to get more information about Captain Ramsey, and we'll have it for you Friday on WHNT NEWS 19 at 5:00 and 6:00.

    I bet his family would disagree! Here is what you guys need to understand, these young men and women stand ready day and night to make the ultimate sacrafice if needed so you and I can have this debate. Most of them would tell you that even though they disagree with you they do what they do so you can think that way. You say they should not get a retirement at 38. What you don't get is they don't get paid much as it is so IMO it all balaces out. They get what they should have been paid for their service on the back end.

    I can post numerous stories of death in my profession as well! We choose to do what we do, until the next draft every man and woman presently enlisted made a concious decision to do so.

  • bamacharm said... (original post)

    I am an Army Reserve retiree with 28 years of active and reserve service, Desert Storm deployment and two post 9-11 active duty tours . My retirement benefits begin at age 60 (about 3 years to go).

    I don't like it that military retirements are being moved out to age 60, who would? However, the question should be, "is it necessary?".

    I believe the answer is overwhelmingly "yes".

    The country has been spending beyond its means. We are in very, serious debt crisis that threatens not only our children's economic future but our national security.

    Some in the private sector have taken huge hits in terms of what they pay for and/or receive in retirement/health benefits. State government workers and teachers have also taken big hits.

    There is no choice. The feds MUST also reign in spending on every level: social security, medicaid, medicare, public assistance, and military spending. There will be sacrifice and it will be painful.

    Unfortunately, the military will have to take a hit. Nobody wants that but it's no longer an option. Those that serve in the military must also share the economic sacrifice.

    Let's face it, pensions are supposed to be about security in your elderly, non-working years. Taken before retirement age, they have become supplemental income.

    Demographics have changed. We have a larger percentage of the population who are 65 and older. The current system is unsustainable. The private sector and government will be unable to pay out a pension that lasts for 20 years or more.

    An individual that enlists at 18 in the active military is now eligible to retire on half pay at age 38. If they live to just the average male life span, that is a 40-year pension. It's unsustainable.

    Sorry but there is no choice.

    I think you are a very wise man. Thanks for your service to our country and thanks for having the courage to step up and say, "If we need to make a change then lets make it." That being said, I feel like military retirements is one of the last places we should raid. If its needed to keep the country together then fine, but surely we can look at another group who hasn't sacrificed so much for our country already.

    signature image signature image signature image
  • homebrothajr said... (original post)

    Number of US Presidents: 1
    Number in House and Senate: 535
    Number of members of our military, active and reserve: More than 2.2 million (as of May 2009).

    Why would you include reservists In those numbers? They have the equvilant of a private sector health and retirement plan. There are roughly 1.1 million arrive members...13% will reach retirement(20 years). Those who serve less will get no pension whatsoever. Every person that serves in congress will receive a pension that dwarfs military pension as soon as they retire. That's right...Anthony wiener will be making 6 figures as a retired congressman. Please tell me how that makes sense.

    Why would you include reservists In those numbers? They have the equvilant of a private sector health and retirement plan. There are roughly 1.1 million arrive members...13% will reach retirement(20 years). Those who serve less will get no pension whatsoever. Every person that serves in congress will receive a pension that dwarfs military pension as soon as they retire. That's right...Anthony wiener will be making 6 figures as a retired congressman. Please tell me how that makes sense.

  • BamaFanB4u said... (original post)

    Salary of the US President ..................$400,000 Salary of retired US Presidents ............$180,000 Salary of House/Senate ......................$174,000 Salary of Speaker of the House ...........$223,500 Salary of Majority/Minority Leaders ......$193,400 ...Average Salary of Soldier DEPLOYED IN IRAQ/AFGHANISTAN $38,000

    Retired President's should get nothing. They can make millions on the speaking tours. Why even piss that 180k away?

  • homebrothajr said... (original post)

    Number of US Presidents: 1 Number in House and Senate: 535 Number of members of our military, active and reserve: More than 2.2 million (as of May 2009).

    Wrong. The reserves fall under a different retirement. Also how many of those will actually stay in and retire? I have asked you all supporting this to provide the numbers of enlisted retirees on an annual basis. To include the numbers of the entire reserve and active duty is ludricrous and disingenuous. You must be a democrat.

  • homebrothajr said... (original post)

    I actually would understand it perfectly, but nice assumption to the contrary. And there are as many if not more office pog's than there are guys that go on humps more than once a month as part of a battalion togetherness exercise. My point is there are plenty of folks beat down by their service, but it's disingenuous to suggest everyone who leaves the military is in dire need of retirement because they're too worn down to work another job. Most of those 48 year old's retiring as Col's are the most healthy men in America.

    they are in good cardio health because they are dedicated and do their PT, but their knees are shot and have compression fractures in the vertebrae. Their wives probably left them long ago and their kids never really knew them, but your probably right. we're not worth the pay. you know this because u obviously are a COL. LTC Chandler, 37, 3 years from retirement.

    This post was edited by jayman1974 3 years ago

    signature image signature image signature image
  • jayman1974 said... (original post)

    they are in good cardio health because they are dedicated and do their PT, but their knees are shot and have compression fractures in the vertebrae. Their wives probably left them long ago and their kids never really knew them, but your probably right. we're not worth the pay. you know this because u obviously know what its like. LTC Chandler, 37, 3 years from retirement.

    Sir, I figured hours ago that the majority of folks posting in this thread never served a second. They don't have a clue what it is like to have to plot an exit from the fart sack because their back and knees hurt too much to bend or straighten yet you still do becasue you have soldiers who are watching every move. They know that you just pulled a 24 hour shift without sleep for the 3rd time in 7 days. They just want to b!tch about something. I haven't heard one of em say we should cut any of the free loader programs. Not one of them has even mentioned the FACT that I have tried to tell them that soldiers have to pay into the retirement now.

    signature image
  • homebrothajr said... (original post)

    That's a good anecdote, but it doesn't change the fact that the GI Bill makes college available for many, many people that otherwise would never step foot on campus. Dat's the trufe, trufe.

    I am serious, all she did to get is be broke and apply for it and for the record she pissed it away.

    signature image
  • Proud Soldier here and I haven't read all the post.
    So if I repeat something forgive me. At 10 years in the Army you decide if your gonna make a career out of it. A point some may miss is you can only serve so many years at a rank. I'm a SFC I can stay 24 years if I'm not promoted by then I must go. I'll only be 46. I would gladly stay longer if I was given a choice and could physical do it.

  • homebrothajr said... (original post)

    Umm, I don't think I ever said military members getting pensions is"ludicrous". Quote me if I did. I'm saying it's unsustainable to keep gov't pension levels where they're sitting now. Paying out 40 years of retirement is helping bankrupt our country. I don't like the idea of the military cutting back, but it's necessary. Just as necessary as cutting back every other facet of our gov't. I appreciate your service, I truly do. And I'm sorry to hear you're disabled. I know that can't be easy. One area of our gov't that needs MORE funding is the VA Medical services. But pensions for perfectly healthy 40 year old retirees need to be trimmed down. That's all I'm saying.

    it wasn't you that used the word ludicrous it was forthetide2 or something like that. If you read my intial post on the Capt. You will see that I quoted him. When you replied I assumed it was you since I had quoted him. As far as me being a DAV dont be sorry because I am not. I only want that our Armed Forces stay the best in the world. The only way that happens is if we retain the best and the brightest. We won't be able to do that if we take away the retirement. By doning that you would destroy the NCO corps it is bad enough now that these guys have to learn so fast and they are making rank fast without the years of exp that they need. When you take the incentive for staying in away people will go. A very wise CMS told me when I first got promoted this "if you see a good soldier, there is an NCO to thank for that, IF you see a F'd up soldier there is and NCO to blame for that, If you see a good Officer there is an NCO to thank for that, if you see an F'd up officer there is and NCO to blame for that" My point is if you lose the guys after one enlistment you have no old salty NCO's that teach and train and you will break the back of the Armed Services. If you read what the AF officer wrote above I would agree that we could cut a lot out of the defense budget by getting rid of a bunch of crap spending but not by taking money away from our most prized asset, the soldiers.

    signature image
  • Crazyhorsered4 said... (original post)

    Proud Soldier here and I haven't read all the post. So if I repeat something forgive me. At 10 years in the Army you decide if your gonna make a career out of it. A point some may miss is you can only serve so many years at a rank. I'm a SFC I can stay 24 years if I'm not promoted by then I must go. I'll only be 46. I would gladly stay longer if I was given a choice and could physical do it.

    I am with you. If they want to change the retirement system to make it more like a private sector system, that's fine with me. That said, get rid of high year tenure and let people stay as long as they want to. Forcing some to retire at 40 years of age and then telling him he doesn't get a pension until 65 is ludicrous.

  • Secretary Gates stated in his out-going address that the armed services should NEVER touch pay, whether it be retirement or monthly. He discussed with service leaders that there are other ways to cut the budget, especially when you are going from $440B to whatever the current administration wants the budget to be. Last time the services made huge personnel cuts they got rid of the majority of the experienced troops (they get paid more) and left the services ripe in inexperience across the board. Then the services had to hire more troops to cover for the inexperience, and now they're cutting middle management again either by Reduction in Force or by getting rid of the retirement packages I signed up for. I see many flaws in the bill on the table, such as deployed personnel getting a better retirement package than those that are in career fields that cannot or do not deploy as often. What they are going to end up doing is making another defining class in the service, and there is going to be a bad reaction to it.

  • jayman1974 said... (original post)

    they are in good cardio health because they are dedicated and do their PT, but their knees are shot and have compression fractures in the vertebrae. Their wives probably left them long ago and their kids never really knew them, but your probably right. we're not worth the pay. you know this because u obviously are a COL. LTC Chandler, 37, 3 years from retirement.

    Col's have lived every experience the average soldier has, because someone has to lead them into battle, every Army/Marine Corps/Navy/Air Force field commander was on the front line at one point in time. Do you know what the average fighter pilot experiences in G-Force every flight? Guess what, those are Colonel's leading the fighter squadron. Leaders lead by example. RTR.

  • This post is for members of BamaOnLine only. Join now! Start Free Trial
    signature image signature image signature image
  • This post is for members of BamaOnLine only. Join now! Start Free Trial