Are Military Pensions Too 'Generous'?
Posted: Fri Aug 19, 2011 9:54 am
Before reading this think about our congressional leaders and what they rake in. Don't ever see THEM wanting to take cuts! 
--------------------------------------------------
WASHINGTON – It sounds like a pretty good deal: Retire at age 38 after 20 years of work and get a monthly pension of half your salary for the rest of your life. All you have to do is join the military.
As the nation tightens its budget belt, the century-old military retirement system has come under attack as unaffordable, unfair to some who serve and overly generous compared with civilian benefits.
That very notion, laid out in a Pentagon-ordered study, sent a wave of fear and anger through the ranks of current and retired military members when it was reported in the news media this month.
If pensions are to be cut, Congress should go first, one person said on the Internet.
"Obviously, we're concerned about it," said retired Gen. Gordon Sullivan, an Army chief of staff in the 1990s who heads the nonprofit educational group Association of the United States Army.
The Defense Department put out a statement this week stressing that it was only a proposal and no changes will be made anytime soon.
--Members of the military who retire before 20 years get nothing. Those who work 20 years get pensions worth 50 percent of their pay. That amount ramps up to 87.5 percent for 35 years of service. (memebers of congress can get their pension after one term)
--That means 83 percent of service members don't get a pension, even after serving for 10 or 15 years, while 17 percent do get one.
Will taxpayers want to continue for troops the special and costly programs that they themselves are losing?
"What are the 'dick heads' in congress costing us"? Why don't they report on that issue?
ref:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/08 ... latestnews
--------------------------------------------------
WASHINGTON – It sounds like a pretty good deal: Retire at age 38 after 20 years of work and get a monthly pension of half your salary for the rest of your life. All you have to do is join the military.
As the nation tightens its budget belt, the century-old military retirement system has come under attack as unaffordable, unfair to some who serve and overly generous compared with civilian benefits.
That very notion, laid out in a Pentagon-ordered study, sent a wave of fear and anger through the ranks of current and retired military members when it was reported in the news media this month.
If pensions are to be cut, Congress should go first, one person said on the Internet.
"Obviously, we're concerned about it," said retired Gen. Gordon Sullivan, an Army chief of staff in the 1990s who heads the nonprofit educational group Association of the United States Army.
The Defense Department put out a statement this week stressing that it was only a proposal and no changes will be made anytime soon.
--Members of the military who retire before 20 years get nothing. Those who work 20 years get pensions worth 50 percent of their pay. That amount ramps up to 87.5 percent for 35 years of service. (memebers of congress can get their pension after one term)
--That means 83 percent of service members don't get a pension, even after serving for 10 or 15 years, while 17 percent do get one.
Will taxpayers want to continue for troops the special and costly programs that they themselves are losing?
"What are the 'dick heads' in congress costing us"? Why don't they report on that issue?
ref:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/08 ... latestnews