Feds: are you counting on FERS for retirement?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, not be dense but how does FERS work?

High 3 yr pay * 1% (or 1.1 if 62 yo) * number of years in service

62 yoa and at least 20 years of service to get the 1.1%

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think FERS benefits would be on the chopping block if country's debt problem is not dealt with.

This is going to be very true. Look what happened in Greece and a few other European countries for the pensions. They were out very easily and no-one had sympathy with Govt workers when the rest of the country was dealing with major financial issue.

What are you talking about? Greece has a public pension system.

how were their employees' pension any different than feds? They were all supported by Govt whether it is in a bank account or T-bonds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think FERS benefits would be on the chopping block if country's debt problem is not dealt with.

This is going to be very true. Look what happened in Greece and a few other European countries for the pensions. They were out very easily and no-one had sympathy with Govt workers when the rest of the country was dealing with major financial issue.

What are you talking about? Greece has a public pension system.

how were their employees' pension any different than feds? They were all supported by Govt whether it is in a bank account or T-bonds.

Social security is $1.4 trillion. The Greek cuts were like cuts to SS. No one is going to bother about FERS for existing employees unless we’ve hit mad max.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not counting on FERS and SS. They need to do something about FERS because it is drain to the treasury even after being self-paid liability.

Agree, also paying govt employees. The treasury would be in a better position if they worked for free.

Well, some of the Govt employees are just dead weight and don't have to be at the positions where they are at right now. Get rid of 1/3rd of the employees and you won't feel a difference.

Are you really willing to give up on 1/3 of meat inspectors, National Park staff, Federal highway workers, weather forecast, cancer researchers, FEMA ?

Not only that, but this would not even make a dent in the federal debt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not counting on FERS and SS. They need to do something about FERS because it is drain to the treasury even after being self-paid liability.

Agree, also paying govt employees. The treasury would be in a better position if they worked for free.

Well, some of the Govt employees are just dead weight and don't have to be at the positions where they are at right now. Get rid of 1/3rd of the employees and you won't feel a difference.

Are you really willing to give up on 1/3 of meat inspectors, National Park staff, Federal highway workers, weather forecast, cancer researchers, FEMA ?

Cuts are needed, but need to be surgical. Get rid of the excess laptop warriors sitting at home "working" with a mouse jiggler who are watching Netflix, if they're even home at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not counting on FERS and SS. They need to do something about FERS because it is drain to the treasury even after being self-paid liability.

Agree, also paying govt employees. The treasury would be in a better position if they worked for free.

Well, some of the Govt employees are just dead weight and don't have to be at the positions where they are at right now. Get rid of 1/3rd of the employees and you won't feel a difference.

Are you really willing to give up on 1/3 of meat inspectors, National Park staff, Federal highway workers, weather forecast, cancer researchers, FEMA ?

Cuts are needed, but need to be surgical. Get rid of the excess laptop warriors sitting at home "working" with a mouse jiggler who are watching Netflix, if they're even home at all.

DH is a fed who works from home three days/week, and I can assure you that he works longer hours during his telework days than his in-office days. All the time that he would have spent commuting is now in front of his computer, and he's typically uninterrupted from 7:30 a.m. to 6 p.m.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not counting on FERS and SS. They need to do something about FERS because it is drain to the treasury even after being self-paid liability.

Agree, also paying govt employees. The treasury would be in a better position if they worked for free.

Well, some of the Govt employees are just dead weight and don't have to be at the positions where they are at right now. Get rid of 1/3rd of the employees and you won't feel a difference.

Are you really willing to give up on 1/3 of meat inspectors, National Park staff, Federal highway workers, weather forecast, cancer researchers, FEMA ?

Cuts are needed, but need to be surgical. Get rid of the excess laptop warriors sitting at home "working" with a mouse jiggler who are watching Netflix, if they're even home at all.

DH is a fed who works from home three days/week, and I can assure you that he works longer hours during his telework days than his in-office days. All the time that he would have spent commuting is now in front of his computer, and he's typically uninterrupted from 7:30 a.m. to 6 p.m.

DP. But is anything actually getting accomplished? I'm a fed too and I'm in meetings, on phone calls, and doing work for sometimes 10, 11 hours a day. But I can assure you much of it is mostly made-up nonsense. That's what needs to be cut out -- the periphery b.s. and just attend to the actual mission of the agency.

And address feds who won't do their work, instead of hiring contractors to do it instead. Taxpayers are, in too many cases, paying for an FTE *and* a contractor to do the same job.

[Anonymous]

exactly. Lots of redundant work just to keep the leadership happy. A lot of feds don't pull their weight so we have to hire contractors to do their work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not counting on FERS and SS. They need to do something about FERS because it is drain to the treasury even after being self-paid liability.

Agree, also paying govt employees. The treasury would be in a better position if they worked for free.

Well, some of the Govt employees are just dead weight and don't have to be at the positions where they are at right now. Get rid of 1/3rd of the employees and you won't feel a difference.

Are you really willing to give up on 1/3 of meat inspectors, National Park staff, Federal highway workers, weather forecast, cancer researchers, FEMA ?

Cuts are needed, but need to be surgical. Get rid of the excess laptop warriors sitting at home "working" with a mouse jiggler who are watching Netflix, if they're even home at all.

DH is a fed who works from home three days/week, and I can assure you that he works longer hours during his telework days than his in-office days. All the time that he would have spent commuting is now in front of his computer, and he's typically uninterrupted from 7:30 a.m. to 6 p.m.

There are tons of FEDs that do excellent work but they are overworked and underpaid because other loafers can't do their jobs. This needs to be fixed.

[Anonymous]

I’m depending on it insofar as damn right I’m expecting to receive what I’ve been paying for these past three decades. But it will be dwarfed by my TSP minimum distributions.

[Anonymous]

I expect to have 2 million in TSP by age 50, and 500k in other tax-advantaged accounts like my Roth IRA.

And yes I expect to receive the pension and SS once I’m 62 or so. That will be the fun money

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m depending on it insofar as damn right I’m expecting to receive what I’ve been paying for these past three decades. But it will be dwarfed by my TSP minimum distributions.

what you have been paying - 0.8% of your salary? Your agency is the one paying the most but again it is all invested in T-bonds and could evaporate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I expect to have 2 million in TSP by age 50, and 500k in other tax-advantaged accounts like my Roth IRA.

And yes I expect to receive the pension and SS once I’m 62 or so. That will be the fun money

how old you are now and what is your TSP balance?

[Anonymous]

I am very concerned about FERS getting on the chopping block next time congress decides to do belt tightening.

[Anonymous]

It could happen but the first target would be the FERS contribution for new hires. I think it is fair to move them to 50/50 FERS contribution.