-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
DoD panel calls for radical retirement overhaul
- Thread starter Admin
- Start date
I feel exactly the same way about all taxpayers.
Sent from a phone, too busy working and paying taxes to post from my PC.
What does pay scale have to do with anything? How much federal income tax do you pay in a year?
Sir, I'm sorry that I think military pay blows most of the time and that they deserve a strong retirement package.
Like I said already, if it cant be afforded, then so be it. However, I also said that theres a lot of other bullshit that can be cut 1st, from people in programs who are obviously less important in the grand scheme of keeping America successful.
I dont mind living in a world that has big sacrifices if it will fix things. I do mind living in a world that makes sacrifices in the area where the people are true patriots, fight for the country and its interests and do it for 20+ years. Lets cut the fat off the system 1st, and if we still don't have enough money then I can see this type of talk.
Lessening military pensions is going to do one thing real fast, and thats create a huge retention issue for people who are high speed.
I'm not a Libertarian, so dont act surprised when I act like a huge commy and hurt your feelings.
I can think of two things we can cut immediately that would help:
1. Cut foreign aid to zero dollars per year.
2. Audit the entire food stamp or free benefit programs for scammers.
the 1st idea is almost $50 billion per year by itself.
I'll say it again, the .gov shouldn't be giving out guaranteed retirement packages. If they want to contribute to an employees private plan throughout their career, I'm fine with that. But the ponzi scheme of a guaranteed percentage after 30 years is simply not sustainable.
J
Jose
This all is just another view on the central problem. People want theirs, and they don't see why they should have to sacrifice unless everyone else joins in. Depending on their view, we should cut payments to foreigners, eliminate "waste", tax rich guys more, or some other pipe dream.
One can argue that military guys were promised a pension. Whether money was "paid in" or not is irrelevant. If it is or was, just consider it a pay reduction in real time. Because there is no government pension fund and there is no government savings. Money collected this year is spent this year, with any differences between spending and tax revenue reflected in net borrowing. That's true for social security, medicare, and all other federal handouts. If you believe otherwise, you have been conned.
So, who's promise is better? Military pensions or social security? Federal worker retirement or medicare? It's all bullshit promises passed on to a public stupid enough to trust the government. And it's ending.
So, we can all yell at each other about who's promise is superior or who sacrificed more. But this isn't about sacrifice or fairness, or even decency. It's about a government based on lies, a public too greedy to see it coming, and a reality that is going to hit everyone hard.
Fight it out and see who gets the best chair on the deck. It doesn't matter. This titanic is going down one way or the other.
Most likely, everyone will get paid. So, cheer up. The only bad news is that the payment will come in inflated currency, and that just means we all get screwed together. The most vulnerable, because life isn't without irony, are those with savings. They get hit the hardest when inflation comes. The indebted, the freeloaders and the check cashers can take their wheelbarrows of pension money and buy a loaf of bread or two every week when the checks come in.
Edit to add: I'm not calling pension recipients "freeloaders" any more or less than social security recipients or medicare recipients. All got a promise of future benefits from a government that can't make good on that promise without taking down the economy in the process.
One can argue that military guys were promised a pension. Whether money was "paid in" or not is irrelevant. If it is or was, just consider it a pay reduction in real time. Because there is no government pension fund and there is no government savings. Money collected this year is spent this year, with any differences between spending and tax revenue reflected in net borrowing. That's true for social security, medicare, and all other federal handouts. If you believe otherwise, you have been conned.
So, who's promise is better? Military pensions or social security? Federal worker retirement or medicare? It's all bullshit promises passed on to a public stupid enough to trust the government. And it's ending.
So, we can all yell at each other about who's promise is superior or who sacrificed more. But this isn't about sacrifice or fairness, or even decency. It's about a government based on lies, a public too greedy to see it coming, and a reality that is going to hit everyone hard.
Fight it out and see who gets the best chair on the deck. It doesn't matter. This titanic is going down one way or the other.
Most likely, everyone will get paid. So, cheer up. The only bad news is that the payment will come in inflated currency, and that just means we all get screwed together. The most vulnerable, because life isn't without irony, are those with savings. They get hit the hardest when inflation comes. The indebted, the freeloaders and the check cashers can take their wheelbarrows of pension money and buy a loaf of bread or two every week when the checks come in.
Edit to add: I'm not calling pension recipients "freeloaders" any more or less than social security recipients or medicare recipients. All got a promise of future benefits from a government that can't make good on that promise without taking down the economy in the process.
Last edited:
xtry51
NES Member
Dude I have no experience in the military and I wasn't the one whining about the pay in this thread. I know that if you volunteer for a position you shouldn't spend the rest of your life bitching that it wasn't what you wanted.
FYI I spent what would have been my military years helping to design the nozzles for the F22 and F135, so spare me the "I don't contribute to the defense of our country" tag line.
xtry51
NES Member
Well clearly I was wrong. Obviously you have plenty of money to give to .gov and we should take more of it from you to pay for our poor rag tag volunteer army. How much did you donate last year to help pay our troops more? How much did you give to SS so we could help take better care of people who can still work but choose not to?
People always like to say how great some of these things are, but when you ask them how much extra they donated to that cause the answer is almost always a big fat zero. If you're not willing to put money where your mouth is, stop asking for more shit the rest of us will have to pay for.
I hope not
One more point, while I'm thinking about this:
As of now, and probably many years ago, it's obvious to anyone that a promised pension is not a 100% sure payoff down the road. All over the country, public employees, private employees, union members, and just about anyone who doesn't have gold buried somewhere, is on notice that their "promised" retirement money is at risk.
Part of selecting a job is understanding the risks. One risk is that your retirement money might not show up.
Some of us worry about that risk, and a few of us worried about it a long time ago. We chose work that allowed us to save our own money and not trust government, pension fund managers, or union bosses (Christ, who trusts these people anyway?).
The irony I mentioned earlier is that the problem created by all of these soon-to-be unfulfilled promises is that the most likely political solution is steady (or, worse, rampant) inflation. And that screws us all, especially those of us with private savings under our own control. Now some of us have planned a little for that too, but that's another topic.
As of now, and probably many years ago, it's obvious to anyone that a promised pension is not a 100% sure payoff down the road. All over the country, public employees, private employees, union members, and just about anyone who doesn't have gold buried somewhere, is on notice that their "promised" retirement money is at risk.
Part of selecting a job is understanding the risks. One risk is that your retirement money might not show up.
Some of us worry about that risk, and a few of us worried about it a long time ago. We chose work that allowed us to save our own money and not trust government, pension fund managers, or union bosses (Christ, who trusts these people anyway?).
The irony I mentioned earlier is that the problem created by all of these soon-to-be unfulfilled promises is that the most likely political solution is steady (or, worse, rampant) inflation. And that screws us all, especially those of us with private savings under our own control. Now some of us have planned a little for that too, but that's another topic.
There is, but if the federal.gov went away from percentage retirement plans for ALL employees it would help out tremendously.
I hear what you are saying, and I also know that social security was supposed to be a supplement to either savings or a pension. Everything you say has truth, but bear in mind that when many of us entered the workforce, the defined pension plan was the standard in both the public and private sectors. Back in the day, you were expected to work for the same company for thirty five or forty years, get the gold watch and the company pension. The fact is many couldn't see the other side because "that's the way it was." I'm not making excuses for anyone including myself, but for decades we existed under different economic parameters and a much different business model. It wasn't just the union people either. Companies like IBM, Polaroid, Sears all had great benefit plans for their workers because they valued them as employees. There is a sea change brought on mainly by foreign competition. Look at India, with a highly educated work force in many sectors who will do equivalent work for about 75% less than an American worker.
The horse is out of the barn and it is never going to be 1962 again, that's for sure...and hindsight is always 20/20. The main issue as I see it is that it is going to take a helluva long time for all 54 million baby boomers to die off many of whom are or were under defined pension plans that have gone belly up or are going to go belly up or who have dipped in early into their 401K's as they got laid off (remember that many of these people got into IRA's and 401's mid-career when the private sector began abandoning the defined benefits pension plan and haven't had that forty years to accumulate their funds the way a twenty something might). The problem isn't going away...so how do we solve it? I'd really like to know.
Not making excuses here...I think there are reasons and to chastise a whole group of people who were not even consciously collectivists (many worked for Fortune 500 companies) or socialists may not be a totally fair characterization either (not saying that you did, but it would be a convenient argument, I think).
I always think about all the great American icons represented in the opening scenes of Kubrick's masterpiece: 2001: A Space Odyssey A vision of the future from 1968. The Pan Am space ship (Pan Am gone), cocktails at the Howard Johnson's "Earthlight Room" (HoJo's gone) and the scientist Heywood Floyd talking on a Bell Telephone video phone to his daughter on earth (Bell Telephone gone). Who would have thought?
I am very proud to have lived in the 50's and into the 60's when America was the greatest and strongest country in the world, and the American worker, blue and white collar were the most productive and American made goods were better (for the most part) than anyone else's. I may end up a destitute old man, who knows, but I know of an America that will never exist again and succeeding generations will never know, and that in many respects is the real tragedy in all of this.
Last edited:
OfficerObie59
NES Member
- Joined
- May 3, 2009
- Messages
- 5,419
- Likes
- 1,899
Sorry to bring down the intellectual level of your well-reasoned argument (and I mean that with all sincerety), but my counter would be that the military isn't a corporate suit job.
I don't want a guy getting my back in combat who's there because he's driven by financial incentives. Now, I'll grant you from about 2004 to 2009, that was often the case with the outrageous reenlistment bonues that were given out, but it shouldn't have been. The incentives we promise new enlistees is to get them in the door and allow them to discover if the military lifestyle is for them before they reach their first reelistment (and NCO ranks). It seems if you create more of an incentive at that 4 year mark, you risk retaining people who really shoudn't or wouldn't otherwise be sticking around.
Having a benefit like retirement that is inherently based upon longevity provides an incentive that keeps the good in, but not so perverse that it also retains those who don't want to or shouldn't be there. I agree that it is prudent to consider getting the most from the investments we make (i.e., training), but at the end of the day if money is the main motivator, he's doing more harm than good to the overall force.
Last edited:
J
Jose
I don't think you really understand what you are talking about.
The most people do NOT leave the services because the pay sucks. When it comes to mid grade officers, the percentage that leaves because of salary is extremely small.
This is one case where you have to have been there and done that to understand. Wonkish research does not work.
Is this the shit they teach you in school today?
And I publicly apologize to you to...we were both having a bad........no big deal brother, and I appreciate your service too!
![[smile]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/001.gif "Smile [smile]")
xtry51
NES Member
No, they would never teach personal responsibility in school today. Socialist union workers would never stand for it.
What exactly is wrong with making people earn and save their own money?
i love my job. you ever opened up a machine gun on a peyote?![[laugh]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/012.gif "Laugh [laugh]")
I have killed my share of Peyote too.....and eaten them.....may God have mercy on my soul!
Dude, you are saying that I don't deserve money from Social Security, because I don't work for it, like welfare!
I have been paying taxes and social security for over 50 years.....and now you say I don't deserve anything.
You Sir, are an idiot for confusing welfare and food stamps with social security and retirement.
What is wrong is, the government took my money for years that I could have invested, and then they pissed it away.
Now, young pups like you are mad at me, and tell me I don't deserve anything.
Last edited:
xtry51
NES Member
You don't because that money you gave went to other people as you paid it in. None of the money taken from you is yours. It was taken from you and given to other people as THEIRS. You are not getting money back, you're stealing it from other hard working families. So no, I don't think you or anyone else deserves SS.
To your second bolded point, I thoroughly enjoy how when you were paying money and the government was giving it away to other people in your age group you say they were "pissing it away" yet when you take my family's hard earned tax dollars that I'm paying in you think you DESERVE it. Well sorry to piss in your entitlement filled bowl of socialist cheerios, but YOU DON'T DESERVE ANY MONEY I'VE EARNED.
Last edited:
ochmude
Marine Veteran
As a matter of fact, yes, that basically is my premise. I'm not bitching about the crap pay*. I'm simply saying that, as I see it, if someone has money they they actually earned through actual work forcibly stolen from them for years ends up getting some of that money back, you can't call that welfare.
Let's say you have a kid that's a complete waste of life, and he steals money from you wallet constantly. He turns 18, moves out, experiences real life, has a change of heart, and decides to repay all the money he stole over the years. Is that repayment welfare? Cuz that's basically what a military pension is, unless we're talking about retired field and general grade officers who rake in significantly more.
You're saying that an individual who actually works for a living and actually contributes productively to society, and who has more than half of his paycheck stolen from him to pay income tax, excise tax, sales tax, usage tax, licensing fees, inspection fees, and all kinds of other crap is a welfare recipient for getting some of all that back? I'd be completely in favor of eliminating all such payments, but the theft has to be eliminated on the front end as well.
As do I, 100%
*I am not currently bitching about the crap pay. But when I was in I bitched about everything. It's a sign of high morale
![[wink]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/002.gif "Wink [wink]")
xtry51
NES Member
As a matter of fact, yes, that basically is my premise. I'm not bitching about the crap pay*. I'm simply saying that, as I see it, if someone has money they they actually earned through actual work forcibly stolen from them for years ends up getting some of that money back, you can't call that welfare.
Let's say you have a kid that's a complete waste of life, and he steals money from you wallet constantly. He turns 18, moves out, experiences real life, has a change of heart, and decides to repay all the money he stole over the years. Is that repayment welfare? Cuz that's basically what a military pension is, unless we're talking about retired field and general grade officers who rake in significantly more.
You're saying that an individual who actually works for a living and actually contributes productively to society, and who has more than half of his paycheck stolen from him to pay income tax, excise tax, sales tax, usage tax, licensing fees, inspection fees, and all kinds of other crap is a welfare recipient for getting some of all that back? I'd be completely in favor of eliminating all such payments, but the theft has to be eliminated on the front end as well.
As do I, 100%
*I am not currently bitching about the crap pay. But when I was in I bitched about everything. It's a sign of high morale
Lol, nice post.
My overall tax position is every person with a job should pay the same percentage of tax on their income and there should be no deductions period. What ever they take (and I'm really only willing to give 5% max to federal gov't) they keep and use. There's no tax returns, no paperwork, no how do I get a lawyer to find loopholes. You employer takes the 1-5% and hands it over to uncle sam, done.
Of course in my wonderful world of sunshine and unicorns, the only gov't programs are defense, border security and the post office. There are no other federal laws/programs period. Oh, and the post office only delivers things that fit in a standard mailbox, they're around to provide a very basic support of physical communication and exchange of ideas, not commercial goods transportation. I wouldn't have a problem with even restricting them to letters/postcards only.
ETA: You're example of the child and family does not work when applied to a gov't structure. People who get money from the gov't in general on average remain dependent on .gov their entire lives and never pay it back. If you need proof of this go look at the IRS website and pull up the total $ donated willingly. You'll see no one ever gives back willingly. The point is gov't should only do those things that protect people's pursuit of happiness. The gov't should never be in the business of granting happiness, because the only way a gov't can do that is by taking from those who have and giving to those that don't. There's already a word for that, it's called communism.
Last edited:
That has to be the most idiotic argument I have ever heard on the internet!
It doesn't even warrant a response......it speaks for itself!
