Retirement is threatened to CSRS

[McDuck]

More DELIVERY- and a lot less overhead.

That's the "reform" we need.

How come you people NEVER say that about U.S. government service? huh?

If you liberal hate this country and the principles that it was founded on, why didn't ya'll move to Europe (or at least Canada) long ago? Why destroy this country by voting for people who hate what has made America great in the past?

 

[PessOptimist]

P.S.- the title of this thread is incorrect- it's not just CSRS who would be adversely affected- the proposal also applies to FERS employees as well.

Thanks for pointing that out James. I noticed that also.

Now, let's stop all this "my party right or wrong" BS and get a campaign going to fight it. The way collective bargaining agreements for my job are going, high 3 or high 5 may make a hell of a difference.

On that subject, the last contract was in '07 for 5 years with the raise for the last two (10 and 11) left vaguely connected to "economic conditions".

What did who know and when did they know it?

Great new conspiracy theory. Think I'll spread it around at work.

The truth is out there:notrust:

 

[James48843]

...If you liberal hate this country and the principles that it was founded on, why didn't ya'll move to Europe (or at least Canada) long ago? Why destroy this country by voting for people who hate what has made America great in the past?

Hate my country? No, not a bit. I LOVE my country. Spent 20 years serving in the armed forces of my country, so that people like you would have a right to speak their mind.

Voting? Yes, a great thing. Makes sure that people have a say in how their country is run.

And it works, too, most of the time, WHEN ALL THE VOTES ARE COUNTED.

 

[saturneptune]

There is NO difference between the Democratic and Republican parties. Together, they control 100% of the power in this country. The differences between them are a facade created by the news media at election time.

Neither party is interested in governing this nation by the US Constitution, and neither is interested in serving the American people. Both parties having been robbing its citizens for years, with their allies the lobbyists, corporate thugs, and financial CEO crooks.

As long as we argue about which party is doing a better job, the longer we will be puppets. The goal of both parties is self-indulgence, power grabbing, and control at the expense of the American people.

The only solution is to disamantle both parties and start over.

 

[James48843]

...As long as we argue about which party is doing a better job, the longer we will be puppets. The goal of both parties is self-indulgence, power grabbing, and control at the expense of the American people.

The only solution is to dismantle both parties and start over.

Interesting point.

Greed is human nature, by and large. We need to spend more time thinking about ways to help each other, and lift each other up- instead of spending time thinking about how to tear down each other.

Galatians 6:2- Carry each other's burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ.

A good way to live.

 

[saturneptune]

Interesting point.

Greed is human nature, by and large. We need to spend more time thinking about ways to help each other, and lift each other up- instead of spending time thinking about how to tear down each other.

Galatians 6:2- Carry each other's burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ.

A good way to live.

That is an execellent verse to express the point. Also, something I got to say about one of the above posts. These slash and burn proposals came from a desperate Republican House leadership looking for anything to rally the base. In reality, there is no chance of either of these passing with the present government.

 

[hessian]

Quote:
Originally Posted by wv-girl:
Cuts to Federal Employee Retirement Annuities Proposed in House; Denounced by NARFE
http://www.myfederalretirement.com/public/419.cfm
Just wanting to repost the link, and suggest rather than discussing who's to blame, recommend, what can be done!
- Thanks wv-girl for posting this!!

In my office/division alone, over 1/2 of the approx. 30 people, are over the current eligible retirement age (but under the proposed age 62).
Anyone else also think this proposal will cause immediate applications for retirements (for those eligible under current rules)?? :blink:

Next, what happens to the rest of us left? (many already doing double duty?)
Consider folks thinking of a career in Gov. service will still subsequently
be wanting to join/fill these vacancies?
Consider those currently in, and young enough, think they may as a result, desire to get out/go private sector (if they can)?
One more thought - if this nonsense would go forward - I bet they would try to make it as possible, retroactive.

-whew- -breath in and out-
(& meditate), Galations 6:2 -Nice!

 

[Viva_La_Migra]

WHEN ALL THE ^legitimate VOTES ARE COUNTED.

I believe one should have to prove one's citizenship when registering to vote, and provide at least one fingerprint (like at the DMV), which can be used to verify identity at the polling place.

 

[Silverbird]

Problem with this thing it is retroactive, what you will get is NOT the retirement plan you were offered, if it goes through.

 

[Elgallo]

It is referred to in the REAL WORLD as Bait and Switch!!

 

[wv-girl]

P.S.- the title of this thread is incorrect- it's not just CSRS who would be adversely affected- the proposal also applies to FERS employees as well.

You are right James --my bad. I meant no harm, just was so ticked off, I titled it incorrectly.
Moderators--if you would like to re-name the thread, it's ok. Or just remove the "to CSRS" then it would cover all.

 

[The HalfBreed]

If you liberal hate this country and the principles that it was founded on, why didn't ya'll move to Europe (or at least Canada) long ago? Why destroy this country by voting for people who hate what has made America great in the past?

I've heard that said by quite a few Native Americans also. Of course, they do not differentiate between Liberals and Conservatives....Maybe they have the right idea ..............

When you want to point a finger, you should see that 3 of them are pointing towards yourself.

Comments like that make no sense at all. Maybe you should move BACK to Europe .....

 

[dave1231959]

I haven't noticed any legislators proposing cuts to their pay or benefits.

 

[Silverbird]

Are they on a different program than we are??

 

[BULLonPARADE]

May 2013 is how long I have to last to get to 30 years at age 48. I can stay until 38 years at mandatory FERS retirement age of 56. I might stick around a while depending on what pay & benefits are in 2013, but it will comforting when the day arrives that I can walk.

 

[alevin]

30 at 48. I may be all wet, but I think that equates to 20 yrs@ any age? Would 56 be mandatory for you regardless of CSRS or FERS?

 

[BULLonPARADE]

20 years at age 50 or 25 years any age. Air Traffic Control currently has a mandatory maximum age of 56 years regardless whether FERS or CSRS.

 

[GUCHI]

bp
what did u do start when u got out of diapers ??? lol lol !!!!! what a prime time to get out and enjoy life at the ripe age of 48. wish u well.

 

[wxman2003]

This proposal will never see the light of the House floor. These are typical proposals by the minority party. They propose these ideas knowing 100% that it will never be accepted by the majority party. Makes them look good by appearing that they are doing something, when in reality they do nothing. This holds true when the democrats were the minority, and they were coming up with the lame brain ideas.

 

[The HalfBreed]

Yes, NNuut- that is the the official Republican proposal. Cut federal employees retirement supplement; eliminate official time for Union reps; and change the "High 3" to a "High 5", in order to lower the payout of federal retirement pay.

Previously- two out of three of those were talked about by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) as possible ways to save in the past. CBO mentioned the High-Five idea before- but no one took them up on it--until now. (The Union one is brand new this year-republicans came up with that one on their own).

But this is the first time they have actually been proposed by either party. And it is the republican party who is proposing the anti-government worker ideas, not our president.

What part of "republicans=sworn enemy of the common worker" is not yet clear?

P.S.- the title of this thread is incorrect- it's not just CSRS who would be adversely affected- the proposal also applies to FERS employees as well.

It's simply amazing that the Anti Obama folks are the first ones to point a finger, without looking at the actual facts.

Anywho.....life goes on. Haters are forever.:toung: