Where are you seeing that this passed the Senate?

Anonymous wrote:Unless they were elected pre 1984, they are voting for a paycut for themselves too since they are FERs employees as are all the critters over in the house.

🤔

Apple, Nividia, Boeing and Nike Stock this morning $250 each, too bad you cant time travel

Anonymous wrote:This will get challenged if it passes. Your pay can't get decreased, and this is a decrease in pay because you're required to participate in the retirement system (as compared to benefits like health insurance, which are optional).

Are you going to challenge it? If so, good luck!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do you think your colleagues already paying 4.4 feel about you getting the same pension for so much less contribution.

...who cares?

Then why should they care that you may be moving up to the 4.4 rate?

Because next they'll create a bill raising their 4.4 rate.

Anonymous wrote:Why only for employees hired before 2013?

Because anyone hired in 2014 or later already pays 4.4%.

Why only for employees hired before 2013?

Anonymous wrote:Stop whinging. Look at how much you will have contributed and what you will get in an annuity per year. It's not all taxable either.

You should also look at the overall pay rates in the government vs outside. No ones whining. Everyone looks at their total compensation package. These changes are designed to cut the parts of compensation that are to federal workers advantage while not adjusting the pay rates, which are not to federal workers advantage.

Anonymous wrote:Stop whinging. Look at how much you will have contributed and what you will get in an annuity per year. It's not all taxable either.

You should also look at the overall pay rates in the government vs outside. No ones whining. Everyone looks at their total compensation package. These changes are designed to cut the parts of compensation that are to federal workers advantage while not adjusting the pay rates, which are not to federal workers advantage.

Stop whinging. Look at how much you will have contributed and what you will get in an annuity per year. It's not all taxable either.

Unless they were elected pre 1984, they are voting for a paycut for themselves too since they are FERs employees as are all the critters over in the house.

I am guessing this would be challenged and things might reset.

It’s only passed from senate and would hv go through house and then reconciliation process. CBO found this to be an area to cut funding.

This will get challenged if it passes. Your pay can't get decreased, and this is a decrease in pay because you're required to participate in the retirement system (as compared to benefits like health insurance, which are optional).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do you think your colleagues already paying 4.4 feel about you getting the same pension for so much less contribution.

...who cares?

Then why should they care that you may be moving up to the 4.4 rate?

I haven't asked them to care?

Anonymous wrote:Relax, even if you are in the .8% contribution category, you will only lose 3.6% of your income with the new rate.

That’s a hell of lot less than I’ve lost from my brokerage and retirement accounts in the last week.