4:30 am, May 28, 2015

FederalNewsRadio.com - Purpose of Comments statement Click to show

Hubbard Radio, LLC encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comment boards following articles, blog posts and other content can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior here. We encourage your thoughtful comments which:

  • Have a positive and constructive tone
  • Are on topic, clear and to-the-point
  • Are respectful toward others and their opinions

Hubbard Radio, LLC reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

  • 7

  • Looks like Mike's Rolodex is shrinking!
    Let's hope he's still networking! I look forward to his columns about Food Stamps replacing the FERS Supplement as the third leg of the stool. The bifurcations continue.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • New Name
    Ok, we have CERS and FERS, so what is the new retirement system going to be named? Something with ERS at the end anyway. Any suggestions? How about DERS? (Dumb Employees Retirement System) SERS? (Screwed Employees Retirement System) DCAERS? (Don't Care About Employees Retirement Systerm? I guess we will find out when it goes into play.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • IERS
    Since C is two letters away from F, the next logical initial is I; perhaps "Inadequately-Covered Employees Retirement System"? :P
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • My bet is on...
    FERS Fed
    ...FERS Lite. Food stamps, less filling.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • When FERS was established
    The Original Joe S
    I did an analysis of benefits into the future. 1] Keeping contributions the same, and assuming a 6 or 8% interest rate, I'd have lost $10,000 / year with FERS. [By now, it's probably a greater spread. Since I'm retired, I don't much care.] 2] Putting the MAX into both at the time, other parameters the same, it'd be equal. So, why switch? 3] Under CSRS, if riffed after 20 with age 50, you're immediately retired. Under FERS, if riffed under 55, you were out of luck, and of a job. 4] The Social Security Ponzi Scheme was not attractive even back then. 5] The TSP has taken some big hits. If you are relying on income from it, you'd have had to tighten the belt. 6] They had 2 open seasons to switch. After the 2nd one, some wonk said "We explained it to them and they didn't switch over." DUH! Yup, we understood it allright, and stayed with the GOOD retirement system. Thank Jimmy Peanut for this. Another of his brilliant accomplishments in office.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • "...it'd be equal. So, why switch?"
    FERS Fed
    One reason for making the switch was to have a substantial pile of cash in your TSP account (assuming max contributions + USG match) that belongs to you with which you could do as you please, in addition to the FERS monthly annuity/SS payment. While it's true that you'd need to drawdown the TSP account to have something approaching an equivalent CSRS annuity, your CSRS annuity stops when you die, but the TSP account remains and can be passed to your survivors.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • A few comments
    I, a CSRS employee had the opportunity to switch. I refused. Joe, it appears that you are blaming Carter for FERS. The FERS system came about during the Reagan era. I thought that if Reagan proposed it, it could not be good.-------FERS Fed, I cannot agree with you. it is true that you should accumulate a pile of cash by contributing the match of 5%, but it takes a huge amount of cash to match the annuity. Plus, you must guess right on how to invest the cash. This is a personal opinion and neither of us is right or wrong, but I would prefer the annuity (don't forget the survivor benefit) with less cash(about 1/2 less) rather than the FERS way. FERS could be better for you. There is no right or wrong here.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }