English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-10-19 04:49:22 · 5 answers · asked by lone wolfe 3 in Politics & Government Politics

YOU said it takes 20years of service to get a pension but your vested after 5 years they still get more than they deserve

2007-10-19 05:04:28 · update #1

Wear else can you get a pension as large as thers not in the post office

2007-10-19 05:06:09 · update #2

5 answers

It's incorrect that a congressman receives their full annual salary after one term.

The amount of a Congressperson's pension depends on the years of service and the average of the highest 3 years of his or her salary. By law, the starting amount of a Member's retirement annuity may not exceed 80% of his or her final salary.

According to the Congressional Research Service, 413 retired Members of Congress were receiving federal pensions based fully or in part on their congressional service as of Oct. 1, 2006. Of this number, 290 had retired under CSRS and were receiving an average annual pension of $60,972. A total of 123 Members had retired with service under both CSRS and FERS or with service under FERS only. Their average annual pension was $35,952 in 2006.

2007-10-19 05:02:43 · answer #1 · answered by labken1817 6 · 3 0

Is it fair? - No
Is it true? - Also no.

See http://www.snopes.com/politics/taxes/pensions.asp

Your original question is based on a lie. All the Additional Information you add will not change that.

If you think the members of congress get too much for their pension, find out how much it is (you know, research) and ask a question about the FACTS.

2007-10-19 04:53:44 · answer #2 · answered by davidmi711 7 · 3 0

False. Here is the truth and it takes 20 years of service to get the pension.

http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/weekly/aa031200a.htm

Edit: That is just their 401k and they have to wait until they are 50. They don't get their full pension until they have served 20 years.

2007-10-19 04:57:19 · answer #3 · answered by libsticker 7 · 4 0

Absolutely... we wouldn't want to spend it on educating our children to become better world leaders in the future... that would be catastrophic!

also.. is that true?

2007-10-19 04:53:54 · answer #4 · answered by nothing 5 · 0 1

Sure...what else would we do with the money....buy healthcare for poor kids?

2007-10-19 04:52:16 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers