Advisory Panels Say Military Benefits Unsustainable

[formerlurker]

Advisory Panels Say Military Benefits Unsustainable
Tom Philpott | August 05, 2010
Advisory Panels Say Military Benefits Unsustainable

A consensus is building among current and former military leaders and defense industry executives that rising military personnel costs threaten the viability of the all-volunteer force.

In July, two separate advisory groups reached the same general conclusions regarding what needs to be done to sustain the force. In the nearer term, they say, one step that must be taken is to make military retirees pay more out of pocket for their health care benefit.

"Unless retirees contribute more for their TRICARE insurance, medical costs will not be brought under control and the national defense they served, and for which they fought and sacrificed, will be harmed," says the final report of the Quadrennial Defense Review Independent Panel.

http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,218378,00.html?ESRC=mr.nl



This article completely nauseates me.   Twenty years of service is twenty years of INCREDIBLE sacrifices.   Twenty years of having the service member's constitutional rights (the ones they defend so we can be free) checked at the door.    Twenty years of being on the clock 24/7, 365.  Twenty years of placing their country before themselves every day they wore the uniform.  

To suggest that they are getting too much for their sacrifice is appalling.    Go ahead and gut their benefits.  Go ahead and screw the veterans.   It doesn't take a rocket scientist to tell you 'What's the cumulative effect of all this? will be.  Morons.

"I've heard a four-star military leader comment that DoD is turning into a benefits company that will occasionally kill a terrorist," Punaro said in a phone interview Tuesday.

Oh general/admiral that is freakin hysterical.   Good one dude!   How about you choke on this one instead you pansy suck up -- all those delightful bullshit nonsense procurements you don't need and never asked for but don't have the balls to stand up to Congress over?  how about you just say no to those?    But but... that is how you earned your stars isn't it?   Kissing the rings of Congress that yeah, we totally need those C130Js that are freakin useless in combat Senator cause it will earn you all sorts of donations and votes in your district if we build those.    

Blame it on the benefits kids.   Nice that they take the few perks of being in the military and use it for great fodder.   F&ck the families.  

Just unbelievable.

[BlueStateSaint]

The Dems, with their natural antipathy towards anything military, will jump all over this.

[formerlurker]

Just a thought, how many terms does a Senator/Congressman have to serve to secure lifetime benefits?   

[JohnnyReb]

Just a thought, how many terms does a Senator/Congressman have to serve to secure lifetime benefits?   

It used to be 1...that's a "ONE"...I think it has been changed...I don't know what it is now.

[Eupher]

This is precisely the reason I don't participate in TriCare Prime, or in the VA (apart from guaranteed home loans -- certainly nothing related to medical care).

I'm entitled to it, but I don't do it, even though it's far, far cheaper for me to do so.

You never know when Congress is going to pull the rug out from under you. To be honest, I halfway expected my retirement to vanish as well.

You simply cannot trust the government -- ANY part of government.

[JohnnyReb]

You know, there was a time when military service got you nothing, zip, Nada. You got killed, your family was left destitute, no bread winner, no survivor benefits, no pension for service. You lost a limb, tough luck. I think it began to change after the Civil War and has been growing since then.

I'm not saying they don't deserve benefits, just trying to throw in a little history on the subject.

I also believe in doing what you say you're going to do. If you promise to give or do something for someone, do it. I was raised old school where a man's word was his bond and a handshake meant more than any words a lawyer could put on paper. That attitude has come back to bite me in the ass a few times but in the long run, it has served me well. I sleep well at night.

[NHSparky]

Just a thought, how many terms does a Senator/Congressman have to serve to secure lifetime benefits?   

Five years--so effectively 3 terms for a Congressman, and a single term for a Senator.

I'd love for these assclowns to have come onto any of the boats I served on and tried to last ONE year, let alone 20.  The senior enlisted on those boats were in the 35-40 year-old range, and damned if they ALL didn't look at least 20 years older.  And their bodies matched it.  The pounding, the stress, and the exertion even in "soft" sea duty was incredible.  I can't even begin to imagine the pounding a body takes after 20 years in a combat arm like SF, SEALs, airborne, etc.

So, sit behind your ****ing desks and tell us how easy we have it, asshole.

Oh, and to that unnamed admiral?    With all due respect of course, "Sir"...

[TheSarge]

Saw this the other day on another site and wanted to punch the monitor.

Not to the Perfumed Princes at the Five Sided Palace...the military is NOT corporate America.

Stop listening to the idiots with MBA's and PhD's and start listening to the guys with the SFC and CPT beside their names.

[formerlurker]

You know, there was a time when military service got you nothing, zip, Nada. You got killed, your family was left destitute, no bread winner, no survivor benefits, no pension for service. You lost a limb, tough luck. I think it began to change after the Civil War and has been growing since then.

I'm not saying they don't deserve benefits, just trying to throw in a little history on the subject.

I also believe in doing what you say you're going to do. If you promise to give or do something for someone, do it. I was raised old school where a man's word was his bond and a handshake meant more than any words a lawyer could put on paper. That attitude has come back to bite me in the ass a few times but in the long run, it has served me well. I sleep well at night.

Voluntary vs. non-voluntary.   There is the difference.   

[JohnnyReb]

Voluntary vs. non-voluntary.   There is the difference.   

No, that was voluntary service.

[NHSparky]

No, that was voluntary service.

You gotta admit, that given the relatively small percentage of military enlisted (or officer) that ever reach retirement, this shouldn't be a major issue.  Couple that with the fact that retirement is (at 20 years) 40 percent of the "high-3" base pay, and it ain't nearly as much as one would think.

Hell, I figured that each time I reenlisted, I saved the US taxpayer on the order of $200-250K.  So they want to piss and moan over a few hundred bucks a month for a decade or two at most? 

Let's do the math, shall we?  I initially enlisted for six years, reenlisted twice, and got out at the 12-year point, meaning that in the extra six years I did, I got about $50K.  Training ONE nuke costs over $250K.  Had I stayed in until retirement (no guarantee of that, mind you), I would have saved the US government around $500-600K.

Assuming I retired as an E-7 at 20 years, I would be looking at about $1650 a month.  At that rate, it would take over 25 years (303 months) to eat up the $500K.  But instead, they'd rather spend MILLIONS to replace me 3-4 times over instead of paying 1 guy a retirement.

Penny wise, pound foolish.

[Thor]

What I find abhorrent is the fact that our Congress & Senate get themselves paid very well for what little work they actually do and then, get a nice retirement and GREAT medical benefits for just a minimal amount of service. Military retirement has NEVER been a great "deal", but it's something for one's sacrifice. IF the Government would stop PISSING away money to foreign interests, Expensive Taxpayer Paid Vacations,  or paying for religious endeavors then MAYBE they'd have enough money to spare for the military retirees.

[true_blood]

This administration is really trying to demiliatrize the U.S.A aren't they?!?! No benefits for those whom served this great Country?!? 
GARBAGE!!

[Airwolf]

This is precisely the reason I don't participate in TriCare Prime, or in the VA (apart from guaranteed home loans -- certainly nothing related to medical care).

I'm entitled to it, but I don't do it, even though it's far, far cheaper for me to do so.

You never know when Congress is going to pull the rug out from under you. To be honest, I halfway expected my retirement to vanish as well.

You simply cannot trust the government -- ANY part of government.

Same here you can't trust them. I got an e-mail for Tricare for retired guys like myself that retired from the Guard or Reserves but can't get health care from the government till we are 60 saying we will get Tricare in october but we have to pay for it at the rate of $388.31 for just myself and a rate of $976.41 for my family. They can kiss my fat ass.

[rich_t]

I thought retirement pay at 20 years was 50% of high 3, with an additional 2.5% per each year after 20.

[Zeus]

I thought retirement pay at 20 years was 50% of high 3, with an additional 2.5% per each year after 20.

If you entered the service:

Prior to September 1980 you are eligible for the Final Pay retirement system. Between September 8th, 1980 and August 1986 you are eligible for the High 36 system. After August 1986 you are eligible to choose either the High 36 retirement system, or the Career Status Bonus/REDUX (CSB) retirement system. If you decline to make a choice you will automatically receive the High 36 retirement plan.

clickhere to learn more about the different retirement plans that are currently available

[rich_t]

If you entered the service:

Prior to September 1980 you are eligible for the Final Pay retirement system. Between September 8th, 1980 and August 1986 you are eligible for the High 36 system. After August 1986 you are eligible to choose either the High 36 retirement system, or the Career Status Bonus/REDUX (CSB) retirement system. If you decline to make a choice you will automatically receive the High 36 retirement plan.

clickhere to learn more about the different retirement plans that are currently available

Thanks for the clarification.

[Eupher]

I thought retirement pay at 20 years was 50% of high 3, with an additional 2.5% per each year after 20.

I'm pretty sure it changed for those who enlisted after, say, 1985 or so. Don't quote me on the date. But the deal was, they could serve to 20, but instead of 50% of base pay, they dropped it to 38% (again, don't quote me on the numbers).

[Zeus]

For members who entered active duty or on prior to 8 September 1980, retired pay amounts are determined by multiplying your service factor (normally referred to as your "multiplier") by your active duty base pay at the time of retirement.

If you entered active duty after 8 September 1980, the base pay is the average of the highest 36 months of active duty base pay received. Additionally, your initial (first) cost-of-living adjustment will be reduced by 1 percent.

The "multiplier" for the above two plans is 2.5% (up to a maximum of 75%). For example, a person who entered active duty on or before 8 September 1980, and spent 22 years on active duty, would receive 55% of his/her base pay as retirement or retainer pay. A person who entered active duty after 8 September 1980, and spent 22 years on active duty, would receive 55% of the average of the highest 36 months of active duty base pay.

[vesta111]

If you entered the service:

Prior to September 1980 you are eligible for the Final Pay retirement system. Between September 8th, 1980 and August 1986 you are eligible for the High 36 system. After August 1986 you are eligible to choose either the High 36 retirement system, or the Career Status Bonus/REDUX (CSB) retirement system. If you decline to make a choice you will automatically receive the High 36 retirement plan.

clickhere to learn more about the different retirement plans that are currently available

 wow you really got me going big time going round the old gray matter on this.

Lets see what I can remember here.

Hubby enlisted in 1958 and retired as a warrent officer in 1980.

He told me that his retirement check was based on Warrent pay for 10 years, then it went back to Chief status.

He could have taken the Government program and gone to college at that point but was grabbed by a head hunter for  [NUS ] and offered a job at a pay scale he could not refuse.

He and this bar fly he met with no young kids lit out to travel the country as his job required him to repair old Nuclear Power stations.

All was great until the 10 years lapsed and he was now getting much less retirement----then he lost his job.

Poor fella, it must have been difficult for him, he stopped paying child support for his kids one was 14 the other going on 16.

He would have been better off staying a Chief on the subs, he had to go skimmer and the loss in his pay was to us was huge.

Once he went officer he now had to pay for his own food, he lost the extra hazards pay, and was now gone from home 9 months of the year instead of 3 months in 3 months out.

He ended up living in a trailer park and driving a school bus.  He died at a very early age thinking he was a failure.

But you see he was NOT a failure, he had lived an interesting  life, he went from an 18 year old on a diesel sub that had an encounter with off Taiwan when dropping off freedom fighters to becoming a teacher at Mare Island.

I really think that he over reached himself when it came time to retire, so much had changed and when I tried to speak to him about the pros and cons of his carrear decisions he and both of our family's told me I should shut the Hell up, this was for him to decide.

So I did and I feel so guilty I did not rant and rave at the man, but if I had ----it would have done no good.