8:03 pm, February 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.

  • 10
       

  • Two Ideas
    deployed decoy
    1. Take said spouse on a vacation to Aruba. 2. This only applies to active duty military. Dont retire, ETS. Then get a federal job and Post 56 buy back all that active duty time. Any court order for military retirement dies a sudden death. And any new order must be greatly reduced from the GS13 retirment many years from now. Giving said spouse a very good reason to remarry or go hungry for 15-20 more years.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Not always??
    Dave H.
    Your article implies that sharing of CSRS with an ex- is essentially automatic. But my divorce decree does not mention my CSRS/retirement/pension at all. Therefore, I don't have to worry about it......right? And how does OPM know anyway, one way or another? What's the procedure when I retire?
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • This is one subject I don't want to be an expert in
    contrarian
    But it does seem to me that if you're working just to stick it to somebody else that there's a pretty unhealthy grudge going on. I'm sure there are plenty of us on the short end of various deals, but at some point we have to accept it and move on. Of course, I don't really understand how the ex gets less of a working paycheck than she does of a retiree paycheck, but I suppose that's possible. As for DD's creative thinking, there may be other ways to actually cooperatively work with the ex to accomplish the same thing.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Money Market Fund?
    Briancpa
    Since you seem to be near the end of your career -- why not put the money in a money market fund or just buy gold in your name only? Why take a chance?
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Marriage? Seemed like a good idea at the time.
    dailycheese
    The simple answer to divorce and do I have to pay an ex a portion of my pension is, it depends. A slick attorney will defend his/her client by requiring a court order to apportion a CSRS or FERS annuity as a result of a divorce. The court order must expressly direct OPM to pay a portion of the monthly benefits. So if your decree does not include this language, and OPM has not been notified, you should be home free. Typically, a court order will grant 1/2 of the annuity for the years served, I mean years married. So for CSRS employees, this can be much more expensive than for FERS employees married the same length of time, as the CSRS monthly annuity is larger. Court orders can also affect survivor annuities, FEHBP, and FEGLI. First place to research is 1) your divorce decree and 2) OPM document "Court Ordered Benefits for Former Spouses" RI 84-1.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Reminds us of the larger issue
    ry1nik
    I know this is off the specific topic of the article, but it brings up the hot issue again— what did the former spouse do to deserve 50% of what the other earned? The legal concept of "joint assets" (a questionable concept) aside, there's the argument that one spouse was there to provide "support" of one type or the other to the working spouse, and hence deserves a share. But fully 50% for the shared years? That's like saying a surgeon and a nurse deserve the same compensation because the nurse provided support. No. The surgeon is the one who received the education and training, and shoulders the daily burdens of what he or she does. The current idea that spouses deserve 50% of what the other earned during the married years is bogus. Not sure how the law got to where it is. If there has to be an arbitrary share, it should not be 50%. Even 25% would make more sense.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • excuse me
    Taxpayer Too
    Isn't it usually the wife that stays home to take care of the kids thus not being able to go out into the workforce and add to her own retirement?? If that's the case then why do you think the wife (don't want to assume because we all know what that means) doesn't deserve 50% for the years married? BTW..........I was married to a CSRS guy while I'm under FERS. I'm not the type that likes to be dependent on anyone so I refused his retirement when we divorced. Thank you, I'll get it myself!!
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • to Taxpayer Too
    Moderate
    First, I am married to the mother of my children. Second, I applaud you for getting a job and retirement benefits. Third, you are right about the wife staying home much more often than the husband. PC is not necessary. Fourth, just because I worked does not mean I was not very involved with my children (more than likely as involved as my wife) Fifth, I know of many cases where the wife goes back to work as soon as possible, and day care is used. This is because we are or were, before the depression, a 2 wage earner economy. Therefore, the wife's career is not as affected as we might think.
    worker
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Or do like I did
    CLJ11
    And be VERY specific in the divorce that he had ZERO interest in my retirement and I have none in his. Maybe I would have been better off taking some of his, but a Da*n sure didn't want him to have ANY of mine.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }