Would you have been more likely to join the military if it had a corporate 401(k) type of retirement program?

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 18 Nov 2015 20:44:32 -0500

http://krqe.com/2015/11/18/carter-pushing-retirement-other-changes-for-future-military/

Carter pushing retirement, other changes for future military

Defense Secretary Ash Carter is pushing major changes to the Pentagon's personnel systems that are intended to attract the next generation of service members and drag the often-antiquated bureaucra...

Response by PV2 Scott Goodpasture made Nov 18 at 2015 8:47 PM

PV2 Scott Goodpasture — Wed, 18 Nov 2015 20:47:22 -0500

Everyone here at some point in their life has joined the military. So, what's the question?

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 18 at 2015 9:43 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 18 Nov 2015 21:43:44 -0500

I definitely WILL NOT switch over if given the option.

Response by MAJ Bryan Zeski made Nov 18 at 2015 9:57 PM

MAJ Bryan Zeski — Wed, 18 Nov 2015 21:57:29 -0500

I would not have stayed in for retirement if it was under the 401K plan.

Response by Capt Seid Waddell made Nov 19 at 2015 12:18 AM

Capt Seid Waddell — Thu, 19 Nov 2015 00:18:48 -0500

No. I joined because we were at war.

Response by LCpl Stanley Frieze made Nov 19 at 2015 3:11 AM

LCpl Stanley Frieze — Thu, 19 Nov 2015 03:11:48 -0500

I did not join the service for the benefits. I joined because I wanted to serve my country. Had I not been discharged for a medical condition I would have been a lifer. It didn't matter to me about the retirement. I don't think that any serviceman really worries about that when they sign in.

Response by PO1 John Miller made Nov 19 at 2015 3:38 AM

PO1 John Miller — Thu, 19 Nov 2015 03:38:34 -0500

At the time I joined it made no difference to me one way or the other. But now that I have that green "R" after my name, I am glad I have the traditional retirement and not this BS 401(k) Carter and the rest of the politicians are pushing.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 24 at 2015 6:50 AM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 24 Nov 2015 06:50:06 -0500

Here's another question for this topic. Once implemented, will traditional indefinite deployments become obsolete and phased out?

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 24 at 2015 7:20 AM

Capt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 24 Nov 2015 07:20:06 -0500

When I joined at 17 I had no dreams of retirement. I did not consider staying until 3 1/2 years.

Therefore the retirement program was not a consideration.

But, now I know I have some of the best retirement benefits.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 24 at 2015 7:40 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 24 Nov 2015 07:40:09 -0500

No, the guaranteed retirement is better than what could be. If stocks drop then you are screwed. If you want a 401K type retirement, supplement your military retirement with a Roth IRA. Really BAD idea to change retirement.

Response by 1LT A. Uribe made Nov 24 at 2015 8:08 AM

1LT A. Uribe — Tue, 24 Nov 2015 08:08:34 -0500

The Mikitary (Army) is thinking about transition to a system similar to federal law enforcement type. This is unacceptable and here's the reason why. Retirement is only worth 1.7% per year for the first 20 years only for a total of 34% of your average last 3 years (now congress wants to change average of last 5 years). This retirement of course will be subsidized by a 401k plan that the federal government only contributes up to 5% of your income in this manner. The first 3% of your income only is matched dollar for dollar and the last two percent is matched at 50 cents to the dollar. The last part of retirement is social security, isn't social security going bankrupt? This is disastrous for any one thinking about spending a career with such mediocre benefits. The 401k plan is based on your income so bah, bad and cola would not be a factor, in other words if you spend 20 years you'd probably be best if you jest get on welfare. It would take you 40 teasers of service to only receive 54% of your retirement. Not worth it at all to anyone that knows the military is tough job.

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 24 at 2015 8:09 AM

PO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 24 Nov 2015 08:09:49 -0500

That don't factor in for my decision to join and stay ... my wife is my reason to stay or leave. :) that is the deal I struck with her ... and I will need to live with it.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 24 at 2015 8:44 AM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 24 Nov 2015 08:44:42 -0500

More or less likely...I don't know.

Better off ....YES!!!

Response by Col Robert Ginn made Nov 24 at 2015 8:56 AM

Col Robert Ginn — Tue, 24 Nov 2015 08:56:57 -0500

No. Period. The military is not a "business". You do it because of an internal commitment, call it what you will. Concentrate on your job assigned; don't fuss over PCS's, promotion quotas, riffs, career "tracks", schools, etc. McNamara started this counter-productive wave eroding the armed forces. You put on the suit to defend your country, no matter the "cost effectiveness". Do it or scram.

Response by TSgt Christopher K. Hartley made Nov 24 at 2015 9:14 AM

TSgt Christopher K. Hartley — Tue, 24 Nov 2015 09:14:44 -0500

Go ahead and weaken our military even more with your stupid ideas. The motivation for joining the military has been and should remain love of country. It is bad enough that you've pushed educational benefits as a reason to enlist. I'm not saying we shouldn't have these types of benefits, but don't use them as the reason to enlist. Do yo really want to boost enlistment? Get rid of obama and all the panzy ideas you have destroyed our armed forces with and fire the limp - wristed commanders that sided with obama to keep their jobs and get back to being the world's strongest fighting force. Now, watch you discount what I have just said because of your liberal outlook. A Patriotic Vietnam Vet.

Response by CPO Don Lamb made Nov 24 at 2015 9:25 AM

CPO Don Lamb — Tue, 24 Nov 2015 09:25:19 -0500

I am not sure at of entry it mattered, but it definitely would have been a negative when deciding to stay 22 years.

Response by CDR Russ Harris made Nov 24 at 2015 10:44 AM

CDR Russ Harris — Tue, 24 Nov 2015 10:44:19 -0500

Would not have made any difference in my initial enlistment, but would certainly have been a deciding factor for leaving. It was the then current retirement that ultimately tilted my decision to stay and retire. This new change would certainly have ensured my early departure! Bad move on the oart of Obama!

Response by MAJ Rich Wilson made Nov 24 at 2015 11:47 AM

MAJ Rich Wilson — Tue, 24 Nov 2015 11:47:58 -0500

I would have signed up regardless. It's difficult for most young soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines that are married and have kids while receiving welfare to stay afloat. Moms on WIC and trying to put money into a retirement account. The car dies and now a replacement is needed. Good luck!

Response by SPC Nate Reynolds made Nov 24 at 2015 1:21 PM

SPC Nate Reynolds — Tue, 24 Nov 2015 13:21:27 -0500

No, because I was 19 and ready to do something with my life. I didn't even put into the retirement system that is currently available, until after I transitioned into the Air Force Reserves and started a family, then I realized I needed to plan for the future instead of live in the now. The one smart thing I did when I enlisted was take the Army College Fund instead of the signing bonus.

Response by 1SG Antwan Nicholson made Nov 24 at 2015 1:43 PM

1SG Antwan Nicholson — Tue, 24 Nov 2015 13:43:57 -0500

No!

I was freaking 18 years old, full of myself, and didn't know my a$$ from a hole in the ground. I just wanted to get away and do my own thing.

Response by TSgt Ronald Reed made Nov 24 at 2015 6:30 PM

TSgt Ronald Reed — Tue, 24 Nov 2015 18:30:42 -0500

If I knew at the time I enlisted and knew I had to depend on a 401(k) type of retirement program I would not have enlisted, even though I would have probably have been selected in the draft. If you don't know what Obama wants you to use the 401(k) type of retirement system is so he can take out all of our money as they have with the social security fund. You know, what is ours is his. It's a sorry state that our government has gotten this country into such bad shape. I'm 73, served in Vietnam during 1968 - 1969 and if they would take me back I would go so some `18-19 year would not have to enlist.

Response by SSG John Gillespie made Nov 24 at 2015 8:10 PM

SSG John Gillespie — Tue, 24 Nov 2015 20:10:58 -0500

In short: No.
In long form: HELL NO!

Upon further reflection, TSP serves as the 401k for U.S. Government employees with less costs vs other programs of its type. So, in reality, we already have a 401k retirement plan in place. I was unaware of it until late in my career due to lack of information even though it has been around for decades.

The major problem for us regarding TSP is that DoD does not match contributions for Service Members, though GS employees receive contribution matching as mandated by Federal law, regardless of Department. As to comments made by this new Secretary, if he means to lobby for replacement of Military Retirement Pay by pushing it all off onto TSP, even with contribution matching in line with that received by GS employees, that's extremely problematic.

Response by Cpl Tou Lee Yang made Nov 24 at 2015 8:13 PM

Cpl Tou Lee Yang — Tue, 24 Nov 2015 20:13:27 -0500

Through my trials and tribulation, I wished I never joined the military. I would rather work at McDonald if I knew I would encounter so many obstacles during my career. I felt I wasted the primes years of my life, withering away in a racist institution.

Response by COL John Hudson made Nov 24 at 2015 8:47 PM

COL John Hudson — Tue, 24 Nov 2015 20:47:46 -0500

CPT Adair, I contributed 30 years of my life to the Army. I accumulated the requisite number of retirement points consummate with moving up through the ranks (I was Enlisted, Warrant, and Commissioned). My retirement income from the military is "COMFORTABLE PLUS,"...nicely augmented by investments in civilian annuities and other plans. Born in 1947, I have an advantage with Social Security income that saw this generation's age range get legislated away. I have no complaints.

Those same opportunities are available to any person (male/female) who decides to make the military their career. I decided long ago to stay away from that roller coaster ride otherwise known as the "Stock Market." Too much volatility going daily up and down for me.

The proposed 401(K) plan idea has merit "IF" it is in addition to the existing military retirement pay program. But what I read of the proposal seems shortsighted, in that its primary purpose is stated to provide "some" financial assistance if a service member leaves before completing a standard 20 or more years. Every 401(K) plan I know of (plus the one I had) does not start to really take off until about year 12 thru 15 when compound interest takes really hugh leaps.

Other investment opportunities, such as IRA (Individual Retirement Accounts), Annuities and Certificates of Deposit offer reliable rates of return over the period of a career - whether 20 or more years (both short and long term CD programs are available). RULE #1 and only = don't put all your retirement eggs in one basket. RULE #2 - always and only deal with a reputable organization - one that's been around for a long long time.

My advice to any young person joining the military...start that personal retirement plan NOW - with the first military paycheck. Speak with older service members who have been around for a while and learn from them what type of successful civil retirement opportunities they have invested in.

Response by MSgt Wayne Morris made Nov 24 at 2015 9:28 PM

MSgt Wayne Morris — Tue, 24 Nov 2015 21:28:11 -0500

Definitely would not have stayed in for 20 with a 401K. During much of my time the pay wasn't that great regardless of the magic numbers they used to post annually and a 401K depends too much on the stock market and such. There is nothing better than knowing you are going to get that check the first of every month.

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 25 at 2015 12:16 AM

LCDR Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 25 Nov 2015 00:16:25 -0500

I probably would have done one tour... but I wouldn't have stayed or come back.

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 25 at 2015 6:21 AM

CW5 Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 25 Nov 2015 06:21:13 -0500

How many 18 year olds are thinking about a 401k?

Response by SFC David Davenport made Nov 25 at 2015 2:07 PM

SFC David Davenport — Wed, 25 Nov 2015 14:07:21 -0500

I would have joined up regardless of the retirement. I am waiting for the change to military retirement to become law before judging it. I find it highly unlikely to be in someone's best interest to switch to the new system once it becomes law. How well it works will depend almost entirely on young Soldiers being willing to contribute to the TSP. What portion of young Soldiers understand the TSP and contribute anything significant to it? Not very many sadly.

Response by Lt Col John Tringali made Nov 29 at 2015 1:53 PM

Lt Col John Tringali — Sun, 29 Nov 2015 13:53:09 -0500

No, far less likely. One of the major benefits of a military career is that at around 42 years old, you can draw on a pension which would be equivalent to a $2M annuity. This TSP/401K option is crap because you can't draw on it immediately when you retire from the military. That loss of time, combined with the lack of "cash" base, makes this system far from attractive to anyone seeking career employment with the military. As for the "well, who else gets to retire at 40" argument, the 20 year pension was also an offset to the pay for lost time trudging through a linear style promotion system for 2 decades instead of working up a corporate ladder where progression is merit based, not time based (and don't think military rank isn't mostly time based with only partial merit for BTZ promotions... you still can't skip from E-1 to O-10 in the military like you can in the corporate world). Finally, stability. Doesn't anyone remember 2008? How would you like to retire just when wall street bankers lose another bet with the global economy and now your "401" retirement plan pays out $240/month? Of course, it will recover... someday, but for now you have to go back to work at perhaps 65 (retirement age in 15 years from now).

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 29 at 2015 1:59 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 29 Nov 2015 13:59:01 -0500

To join the military it really does not matter or did not matter to me. Now for me to stay in military retirement was a huge factor in my choice to stay in the military. The 401K idea is better for those who get out before 20 but is horable for throes that do more then 20 years.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Nov 29 at 2015 2:43 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Sun, 29 Nov 2015 14:43:11 -0500

At that age I might not have a clue what a 401k is and what it means for my future decisions.

Response by SGM Mikel Dawson made Nov 29 at 2015 9:21 PM

SGM Mikel Dawson — Sun, 29 Nov 2015 21:21:29 -0500

I had a long term plan when I joined the USAR - get something to supplement my retirement income. Yea, it's only a Reserve retirement, around $1,100 a month, but this was what I planned on. I get to cash in this next year!! I've paid into SS and will continue to work a little as I love my work. My failure: I wish I'd stuck away at least $20 a month into some kind of savings plan EARLY in my work career, but at that time no one every talked to me about it and I never thought about it.
You young guys, don't make the mistakes I did by waiting unil midlife to do so. Be safe in your investments. I stayed away from stock market, instead I invested in land. In your 20s you might not think about getting old, but let me tell you, it sneaks up on you - FAST!

Response by SP6 Michael Simons made Nov 30 at 2015 6:50 PM

SP6 Michael Simons — Mon, 30 Nov 2015 18:50:28 -0500

Im a retiree I would not have done 20 years for a 401 K only. I would however invest in a 401 K in addition to military retirement at 50 percent. I believe the 401 k / TSP program is great for those serving one hitch then moving on. However it is not a good deal for those serving 20 or more years.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Dec 1 at 2015 1:49 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Tue, 01 Dec 2015 13:49:04 -0500

Probably not. Retirement at 20 is a great deal.

Response by SFC William Adamek made Dec 3 at 2015 11:40 AM

SFC William Adamek — Thu, 03 Dec 2015 11:40:02 -0500

I believe most will say that it would not have affected their decision to join but would have impacted on their decision to stay in.

Response by SMSgt Thor Merich made Dec 3 at 2015 12:46 PM

SMSgt Thor Merich — Thu, 03 Dec 2015 12:46:24 -0500

When I first joined, I only planned on doing one tour. So it would have made no difference. But if I was looking for a retirement, the 401(k) thing would not be an incentive for me. I guess its the way of the future, but I don't like it. If the govt will do that to the military, they need to change social security too. But I don't see that happening.