Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 37 to 48 of 101

Thread: and the HITS just keep on coming!

  1. #37

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Stinking desert valley of bad air quality, AZ
    Posts
    2,993

    Default Re: and the HITS just keep on coming!

    Quote Originally Posted by James48843 View Post
    Yeah, that's where I left it too.

    Section 3101(a) doesn't seem to have anything applicable to deductions for regular annuity and sub paragraph (3) seems to say 7% should be deducted. Strange.

    Right now I need to get my past MRA butt in to bed so I can go to work to earn my exorbitant salary and contribute to my xtremely lucrative retirement annuity.

  2.  
  3. #38

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    14,685
    Blog Entries
    13

    Default Re: and the HITS just keep on coming!

    Quote Originally Posted by PessOptimist View Post
    Yeah, that's where I left it too.

    Section 3101(a) doesn't seem to have anything applicable to deductions for regular annuity and sub paragraph (3) seems to say 7% should be deducted. Strange.

    Right now I need to get my past MRA butt in to bed so I can go to work to earn my exorbitant salary and contribute to my xtremely lucrative retirement annuity.
    it says:
    (A) the applicable percentage under paragraph (3), minus (B) the percentage then in effect under section 3101(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to rate of tax for old-age, survivors, and disability insurance).
    That means 7% MINUS the amount contributed to Social Security for old-age, survivors, and disability.

    Social Security rate in 26 USC 3101(a) is 6.2%.
    26 USC § 3101 - Rate of tax | LII / Legal Information Institute

    So....the difference is 7% - 6.2% = 0.8%.

    That is why you pay 0.8% of your salary in FERS retirement.

  4.  
  5. #39

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Stinking desert valley of bad air quality, AZ
    Posts
    2,993

    Default Re: and the HITS just keep on coming!

    Quote Originally Posted by James48843 View Post
    That means 7% MINUS the amount contributed to Social Security for old-age, survivors, and disability.

    Social Security rate in 26 USC 3101(a) is 6.2%.
    26 USC § 3101 - Rate of tax | LII / Legal Information Institute

    So....the difference is 7% - 6.2% = 0.8%.

    That is why you pay 0.8% of your salary in FERS retirement.
    Thanks for clearing that up. I looked up 3101 yesterday at the same url but for whatever reason OASDI did not click and I did not read the whole thing. Chalk it up to being long past MRA. Now, as we used to say where i grew up "dawn breaks over Marblehead". I never questioned why we contribute what we do toward the FERS annuity.

    It looks like they are trying to remove one leg of our three legged FERS stool. Maybe not remove but significantly increase the cost to us.

    Quote Originally Posted by James48843 View Post
    Have my own copy of Title 5 and have read it? Yes, I do. You better believe it.

    and Yes, I looked it up BEFORE I TOOK THE JOB IN 1991, because I carefully always consume all the information I think I need before making such a life-long decision such as whether or not to change careers.

    Are you saying that you are only now looking at what your pay in retirement is going to be? Wow. You are already past your minimum retirement age, then...well, I'll leave that up to you. Some of us actually took the time to understand what we were getting into, and did the math, and made our life-long career decisions decades ago.

    No, eliminating FERS supplement means either that I will have to work 5 years longer, or lower my estimates considerably in lifestyle into retirement.

    Not fun either way.
    That comment about having a copy of the USC was aimed at everyone. Sarcasm is my way sometimes. It has to do with where I grew up.

    I have a PDF copy and have read some of it but obviously not all of it in depth. When I took this job in '97 I did read all the stuff I received about benefits but the main factor was the hourly wage which looked pretty good compared to my former military career and current temp job at minimum wage plus $.50.

    I was 45 when I began this job and have always been well aware of when I could retire and how much I would get. That is the main reason I will be sticking around for 65 and 20 years time. Maybe. It all depends on how much the rules get changed.

    Changing the rules mid game does suck and even if this attempt fails I'm sure the same language will pop up somewhere else. Some of it all ready exists in various other bills.

    Maybe the next attempt will be called "To State that Clubbing Baby Seals to Death is Bad, and for other purposes".

    There goes that warped sense of humor again.

    Thanks for your help in deciphering this and for keeping an eye on what congress is up to. I hope others have enjoyed this discussion.

  6.  
  7. #40

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    14,685
    Blog Entries
    13

    Default Re: and the HITS just keep on coming!

    And the hits just keep on coming!

    Today- Senator Kent Conrad, (D-North Dakota) , Senate Budget Committee head, announced his proposals for federal budget will incorporate many of the cuts previously proposed.

    Included in Conrad's Democratic Proposal--many of the pay and compensation cuts of the Bowles-Simpson proposal:

    Speaking on the plan, Conrad said, "I will begin a Budget Committee markup of a long-term budget for the nation. As my Chairman’s Mark, I will lay down the bipartisan Fiscal Commission plan, also known as the Bowles-Simpson plan. It is a plan which I believe represents the best blueprint from which to build a bipartisan deficit reduction agreement that can ultimately be adopted."
    So what does this mean if you're a federal worker? Here's a refresher on some of what the Simpson-Bowles plan contains:


    • Impose a three-year freeze on pay for members of Congress
    • Impose a three-year pay freeze on federal workers and Defense Department civilians
    • Reduce the size of the federal workforce 10% through attrition
    • Reduce federal travel, printing, and vehicle budgets
    • Use the highest five years of earnings to calculate civil service pension benefits for new retirees (CSRS and FERS), rather than the highest three years prescribed under current law, to bring the benefit calculation in line with the private sector standard
    More details:
    News Articles: Pay/Benefits Cuts Proposed by Senate Budget Committee

    Dang! And the HITS JUST KEEP ON COMING!

  8.  
  9. #41

    Default Re: and the HITS just keep on coming!

    Quote Originally Posted by James48843 View Post
    And the hits just keep on coming!

    Today- Senator Kent Conrad, (D-North Dakota) , Senate Budget Committee head, announced his proposals for federal budget will incorporate many of the cuts previously proposed.

    Included in Conrad's Democratic Proposal--many of the pay and compensation cuts of the Bowles-Simpson proposal:



    More details:
    News Articles: Pay/Benefits Cuts Proposed by Senate Budget Committee

    Dang! And the HITS JUST KEEP ON COMING!
    Sounds good to me.

  10.  
  11. #42

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    14,685
    Blog Entries
    13

    Default Re: and the HITS just keep on coming!

    And the HITS JUST KEEP ON COMING:

    Seantor Tom Coburn (R-Oklahoma) proposes mega-cuts to the Postal Service, including MANDATORY RETIREMENT OF ALL USPS RETIREMENT ELIGIBLE WORKERS, AND AN END TO COLLECTIVE BARGAINING FOR POSTAL WORKERS.

    The Senate will resume debate on postal reform Tuesday, considering several amendments to its bill that would affect workers’ pay and benefits.

    Measures that would prohibit collective bargaining at the U.S. Postal Service, require retirement-eligible employees to retire, and increase the amount workers contribute to their health benefits and life insurance are among the 39 amendments the Senate plans to vote on as part of the 21st Century Postal Service Act (S. 1789). Other amendments would limit executive pay at USPS, remove language scaling back workers’ compensation benefits, and curtail the amount agencies can spend on government conferences.

    Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., is shepherding a few amendments to S. 1789, including one that would force the Postal Service to dismiss workers who are eligible for retirement to reduce expenses. The legislation in its current form allows USPS to offer buyouts to eligible employees to reduce personnel costs, but Coburn believes requiring eligible workers to retire is a smarter and more cost-effective downsizing strategy. “S. 1789 would provide buyouts -- essentially cash bonuses or years of service credits -- to encourage postal employees to decide to retire,” said a summary of the amendment from Coburn’s office. “But there is a real risk that these buyouts will go to workers who would already be planning to retire anyway. That is, these buyouts may essentially be retirement gifts to already retiring workers.”
    and the HITS JUST KEEP ON COMING.....

    MORE:
    Pay and benefits feature prominently in postal reform bill - Pay & Benefits - GovExec.com

  12.  
  13. #43

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    185

    Default Re: and the HITS just keep on coming!

    [QUOTE=James48843;359212] Seantor Tom Coburn (R-Oklahoma) proposes mega-cuts to the Postal Service, including MANDATORY RETIREMENT OF ALL USPS RETIREMENT ELIGIBLE WORKERS, AND AN END TO COLLECTIVE BARGAINING FOR POSTAL WORKERS.

    ... Thanks James for keeping the drumbeat and us informed. Thankful I'm not working for the Postal Service, yet it is increasingly difficult to work when they've placed us in the sewer, trying to flush us down to the cesspool, while trying to hold my brown umbrella over my head each day of public service to fend off the brown stuff that keeps rolling down the hill (trickle-down), all while trying to dodge the arrows being aimed at the targets somebody pasted to my back and chest. Ho- Hum.

  14.  
  15. #44

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    14,685
    Blog Entries
    13

    Default Re: and the HITS just keep on coming!

    and the HITS Just KEEP ON COMING:

    Take a look at today's Govexec.com top story:

    Romney rips 'unfairness' of federal pay, benefits - Pay & Benefits - GovExec.com

    and the HITS JUST KEEP ON COMING....

  16.  
  17. #45

    Default Re: and the HITS just keep on coming!

    Quote Originally Posted by James48843 View Post
    and the HITS Just KEEP ON COMING:

    Take a look at today's Govexec.com top story:

    Romney rips 'unfairness' of federal pay, benefits - Pay & Benefits - GovExec.com

    and the HITS JUST KEEP ON COMING....
    Yet most of the people on this board would vote for Romney today. As I look at the fact that I am a Fed, am I better off with Romney or Obama?
    Is today Saturday again?


  18.  
  19. #46

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    6,999

    Default Re: and the HITS just keep on coming!

    Quote Originally Posted by jkenjohnson View Post
    Yet most of the people on this board would vote for Romney today. As I look at the fact that I am a Fed, am I better off with Romney or Obama?
    Romney stated unfairness, President Obama froze our pay.... I make 35% less pay than my contractor counterparts, but get a better retirement plan....Health benefits are about the same. I say right now, my perspective is that I took an oath to do my job and I never had to when I was in the private sector.
    THIS IS WHERE I WOULD PUT SOMETHING TO REPRESENT MY THINKING, BUT THEN THEY SHOW UP!
    Tracker =
    Check my position

  20.  
  21. #47

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    14,685
    Blog Entries
    13

    Default Re: and the HITS just keep on coming!

    I am trying to simply post factual data without comment. But yes, that was the lead story on govexec.com today.


    And the HITS JUST KEEP ON COMING.........


    (I imagine we're going to hear a lot this campaign about federal employees.)

  22.  
  23. #48

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    6,999

    Default Re: and the HITS just keep on coming!

    Quote Originally Posted by James48843 View Post
    I am trying to simply post factual data without comment. But yes, that was the lead story on govexec.com today.


    And the HITS JUST KEEP ON COMING.........


    (I imagine we're going to hear a lot this campaign about federal employees.)
    I haven't seen anything but facts pointed out here (except a rhetorical question from jk). This thread has been nothing but fair.
    THIS IS WHERE I WOULD PUT SOMETHING TO REPRESENT MY THINKING, BUT THEN THEY SHOW UP!
    Tracker =
    Check my position

  24.  
Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
S&P500 (C Fund) (delayed)
and the HITS just keep on coming!
(Stockcharts.com Real-time)
DWCPF (S Fund) (delayed)
and the HITS just keep on coming!
(Stockcharts.com Real-time)
EFA (I Fund) (delayed)
and the HITS just keep on coming!
(Stockcharts.com Real-time)
BND (F Fund) (delayed)
and the HITS just keep on coming!
(Stockcharts.com Real-time)

Yahoo Finance Realtime TSP Fund Tracking Index Quotes