Military retirement system broken, board says

[unhappycamper]

http://www.stripes.com/polopoly_fs/1.113755.1281196022!/image/598266648.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_240/598266648.jpg


Military retirement system broken, board says
By Lisa M. Novak
Stars and Stripes
Published: August 7, 2010

NAPLES, Italy — The military retirement system is unsustainable and in dire need of repair, according to an influential Pentagon advisory board.

The Defense Business Board — tasked by Defense Secretary Robert Gates to find ways to reduce the DOD budget — says annual Treasury Department payments into the system will balloon from $47.7 billion this year to $59.3 billion by 2020.

The 25-member group of civilian business leaders suggests that the Defense Department look at changing the current system, even hinting at raising the number of years troops must serve before being eligible for retirement pay.

The current system “encourages our military to leave at 20 years when they are most productive and experienced, and then pays them and their families and their survivors for another 40 years," committee chairman Arnold Punaro told board members at their quarterly meeting late last month.

Making troops serve longer before receiving pay does not sit well with some servicemembers.

[Obamanaut]

1. Some years back, in the 1970s, parts of the system were changed

regarding lifetime medical care for retirees. IIRC, they made it so that retirees, when reaching 65, got medicare and the military medical benefits went away (or something like that).

This caused an uproar, and many probable careerists, at about their 10 year level, got out when their enlistments expired.

Then, another change came about via Tricare, where at age 65 Medicare still kicked in, but Tricare for Life became the supplemental medical insurance at no cost to the retiree. This is the plan I have now.

Some of the above may not be totally accurate. Miz O tells me that parts of my memory have become faulty.

ETA Some will make the military a career regardless of the changes. I graduated from HS in 1960 ill prepared for college, so I went to basic training with the intention of staying for a career. I did get the college while on active duty, but at age 17 that was not part of the plan - it just happened along the way.

[Submariner]

2. Making troops serve longer before receiving pay

will probably kill them sooner anyway.

When I got out in '69 I remember the "lifers", as we called them, retiring after 20 years service when they were all of 38 to 40 years old. A military career seemed to age them before their time.

I remember these guys looking like they were 50, instead of in their late 30s. The 30 years guys (now in there late 40s) could easily pass for a 65 year-older. The 30 year guys had gone through multiple depth charging attacks during WWII, so their faster aging was somewhat understandable living in a 300-foot long by 27-foot wide sewer tube for so long.

The 18 to 20 hour days at sea wore my 21 year old ass out, so I can imagine how exhausted the lifers must have felt in the long run. It's a steady job if one re-enlists, but a hard job...at least at sea. That retirement check at 38 years old was a strong incentive. The military retirement pay, plus social security pay, made for a comfortable retirement for my Pearl Harbor survivor uncle. He earned it.

[hack89]

3. War is a young persons game

that's why the present system was set up in the first place.

[fasttense]

4. They already did some tinkering with the military retirement pay.

No longer do you get 50% of your base pay after 20 years but they average your base pay over 3 years and subtract 1% of your cost of living adjustment every year. Then there is the semi-optional retirement plan called REDUX. It allows you to take your full retirement pay after 40 years but hardly anything after 20 years. You get to make that decision in your 15th year in the military.

Military service is a hard life. Recruitment is down so changing the retirement system offered to new recruits could reduce the number of people signing up.

What they most likely want to do is change the retirement system for the current retirees. But the US government has a contract with them and they are a strong politically involved interest group. They have already taken Uncle Sam to court once to get Tri-Care for life, we wont sit quietly by as our retirement is taken away. They are already trying to steal our Social Security.

[onethatcares]

5. let's tinker with the congressional retirement plan first.

how many of those illustrious leaders are willing to give up 2/3ds of their plan?

Let's not forget piss testing before every election also.

[kenny blankenship]

6. Maybe there are just too many people in the system because the system is too large

Ever think of that, Defense Business Board? Maybe you should recommend higher taxes to pay for the huge system we have, or else recommend downsizing it. But then again, your real job is to keep the business booming.