Has anyone else really read the new military retirement plan?

[HMCS(FMF)Ret.]

Why? Because they are two different systems. That 37 year old active duty retiree actually completed 20+ years of continuous active service prior to claiming his/her pension. Most NG/Reserve guys haven't come close to 20 years TIS by the age of 37. NG/Reserves, in most cases, have a job/career in addition to thier military commitment....Active Duty guys don't and have to start over again at the bottom of the ladder when they get out. That military retirement helps close the income gap. "Because the Guard has to wait until 62" isn't a reason to put an age cap on AD.

You really hit the nail on the head.

 

[ldp4570]

Again do 20 years active duty, then your opinion might hold some weight. Otherwise you're just talking out of your a$$.

Roger that!!!!!!! 21yrs & 5months!!

 

[HMCS(FMF)Ret.]

Roger that!!!!!!! 21yrs & 5months!!

Good deal! 22 years even here.

 

[mugsy]

FYI - this was a proposal by a business practices study group - it is NOT the new military retirement system. This is clearly a trial balloon being let loose to see what kind of opposition crops up. For those of you over 40 and who have been following military affairs, this is not the first time such a proposal has been floated.

 

[Shootin 4 Fun]

A 401K is absolutely not a retirement program.
(

The 401k is a mostly self funded retirement plan and in a lot of cases it's the only savings people have.

If the government would let me opt out of FICA I would contribute that money into my 401k, along with the 15% I'm already contributing + the 5% my employer contributes. Wife has the same program, in 20 or so years we should be able to retire very comfortably.