Deleted
Joined: Apr 19, 2024 10:06:25 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2022 14:23:42 GMT -5
Are you going to wait until your full retirement age to collect social security? Later? Are you going to start collecting as soon as you can when you turn 62?
I was talking to a guy in the bar that regrets starting to collect when he turned 62 because now his monthly payment is not enough for him. He wishes he would have waited. The bartender piped in to say people that wait are stupid because they are losing that money. (If you wait, your social security amount increases.) A different guy I know is retired but not going to collect social security until he turns 70. He is not worried about passing away before then because he will be dead and won't care.
I plan on waiting until I am 67 (my full retirement age).
|
|
pulmonarymd
Junior Associate
Joined: Feb 12, 2020 17:40:54 GMT -5
Posts: 7,365
Member is Online
|
Post by pulmonarymd on Mar 6, 2022 14:28:59 GMT -5
The break even point for collecting early vs later is about78. Once you live past that, you come out ahead by waiting to collect. The math says wait unless you are likely to die before that. Since you get a guaranteed 8% ROI by waiting, I plan to wait
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,431
|
Post by billisonboard on Mar 6, 2022 14:54:31 GMT -5
I should do my own research on this but will toss it out ....
What makes a particular point "full"? Do you get a special premium jump at that point? Just making up numbers but is it like at 62 you get a thousand, 62 and 1 month a thousand three, 62 and 2 months a thousand six, ...., 64 and eleven months a thousand one hundred five, 65 and no months one thousand three hundred, 65 and one month one thousand three hundred and three? Or is it an unvaried increment?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 19, 2024 10:06:25 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2022 15:14:30 GMT -5
I should do my own research on this but will toss it out .... What makes a particular point "full"? Do you get a special premium jump at that point? Just making up numbers but is it like at 62 you get a thousand, 62 and 1 month a thousand three, 62 and 2 months a thousand six, ...., 64 and eleven months a thousand one hundred five, 65 and no months one thousand three hundred, 65 and one month one thousand three hundred and three? Or is it an unvaried increment? That's a good question. I have no idea. I don't think I would get into fractions like that. Once I turn 67, that's it. I don't care if I would get $6.50 more if I waited three months.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,679
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Mar 6, 2022 15:26:15 GMT -5
The break even point for collecting early vs later is about78. Once you live past that, you come out ahead by waiting to collect. The math says wait unless you are likely to die before that. Since you get a guaranteed 8% ROI by waiting, I plan to wait It also depends on what years are going to be included. I think my highest earning year drops off this year if it hasn't already. I'm concerned my SS will be wicked low because of the jobs I've had in the last decade or so. My IT jobs won't be included if I wait until 67. (I think full retirement is 67 for my year.)
|
|
pulmonarymd
Junior Associate
Joined: Feb 12, 2020 17:40:54 GMT -5
Posts: 7,365
Member is Online
|
Post by pulmonarymd on Mar 6, 2022 15:35:39 GMT -5
The break even point for collecting early vs later is about78. Once you live past that, you come out ahead by waiting to collect. The math says wait unless you are likely to die before that. Since you get a guaranteed 8% ROI by waiting, I plan to wait It also depends on what years are going to be included. I think my highest earning year drops off this year if it hasn't already. I'm concerned my SS will be wicked low because of the jobs I've had in the last decade or so. My IT jobs won't be included if I wait until 67. (I think full retirement is 67 for my year.) It includes your top 35 years, doesn’t matter when they occurred. If you have less than 35 years, they put in zeros. It doesn’t go down, and it increases if you wait.
|
|
NancysSummerSip
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 19:19:42 GMT -5
Posts: 36,311
Today's Mood: Full of piss and vinegar
Favorite Drink: Anything with ice
|
Post by NancysSummerSip on Mar 6, 2022 15:37:13 GMT -5
67 is also my full retirement. I'd prefer to wait three more years, but a lot depends on DH's health.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,679
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Mar 6, 2022 15:38:14 GMT -5
It also depends on what years are going to be included. I think my highest earning year drops off this year if it hasn't already. I'm concerned my SS will be wicked low because of the jobs I've had in the last decade or so. My IT jobs won't be included if I wait until 67. (I think full retirement is 67 for my year.) It includes your top 35 years, doesn’t matter when they occurred. If you have less than 35 years, they put in zeros. It doesn’t go down, and it increases if you wait. They changed the formula when Trump was in office. Unless Biden it changed it back, I am SOL.
|
|
pulmonarymd
Junior Associate
Joined: Feb 12, 2020 17:40:54 GMT -5
Posts: 7,365
Member is Online
|
Post by pulmonarymd on Mar 6, 2022 15:46:12 GMT -5
They may have changed the formula in how much you get. Still uses you highest 35 years, and it still increases with waiting
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,431
|
Post by billisonboard on Mar 6, 2022 15:46:31 GMT -5
The break even point for collecting early vs later is about78. Once you live past that, you come out ahead by waiting to collect. The math says wait unless you are likely to die before that. Since you get a guaranteed 8% ROI by waiting, I plan to wait It also depends on what years are going to be included. I think my highest earning year drops off this year if it hasn't already. I'm concerned my SS will be wicked low because of the jobs I've had in the last decade or so. My IT jobs won't be included if I wait until 67. (I think full retirement is 67 for my year.) I think that used to matter but doesn't any longer. The Social Security Administration adds up inflation-adjusted wages for the 35 years you earned the most, divides by 35 to get your average annual wage, then divides by 12 to get your average monthly wage.link
|
|
NoNamePerson
Distinguished Associate
Is There Anybody OUT There?
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 17:03:17 GMT -5
Posts: 25,650
Location: WITNESS PROTECTION
|
Post by NoNamePerson on Mar 6, 2022 15:47:02 GMT -5
I took mine at 62 and have no regrets. They kept moving the goal posts on "full" benefits so I said screw it. And figured by the time I got close to the next "full benefits" age they might move it again. I would have had to keep working or dip into retirement funds if I had waited to 70 and seeing lots of folks I knew wait till seventy and still working just spoke to me as in NAH!! But to each his own. ETA: I didn't have anyone else to factor into the equation so that could make a difference with some pEEps. I just got pissed when I was required to take RMD when I really don't need that money for every day living. But I take it and have learned to enjoy it on whatever.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,679
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Mar 6, 2022 15:48:45 GMT -5
Looks like it is as PMD says. Trump wanted to change it and I thought did to the last 20 or 25 years worked or something like that. My salary history is very uneven. I am nowhere close to what I earned in a span around the year 2000.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,679
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Mar 6, 2022 15:50:53 GMT -5
|
|
Lizard Queen
Senior Associate
103/2024
Joined: Jan 17, 2011 22:19:13 GMT -5
Posts: 14,659
|
Post by Lizard Queen on Mar 6, 2022 16:17:36 GMT -5
Are you going to wait until your full retirement age to collect social security? Later? Are you going to start collecting as soon as you can when you turn 62? I was talking to a guy in the bar that regrets starting to collect when he turned 62 because now his monthly payment is not enough for him. He wishes he would have waited. The bartender piped in to say people that wait are stupid because they are losing that money. (If you wait, your social security amount increases.) A different guy I know is retired but not going to collect social security until he turns 70. He is not worried about passing away before then because he will be dead and won't care. I plan on waiting until I am 67 (my full retirement age). Who the F knows? The trust fund should be empty right before I become eligible for anything so that should be fun. 😖
|
|
NoNamePerson
Distinguished Associate
Is There Anybody OUT There?
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 17:03:17 GMT -5
Posts: 25,650
Location: WITNESS PROTECTION
|
Post by NoNamePerson on Mar 6, 2022 16:32:53 GMT -5
Are you going to wait until your full retirement age to collect social security? Later? Are you going to start collecting as soon as you can when you turn 62? I was talking to a guy in the bar that regrets starting to collect when he turned 62 because now his monthly payment is not enough for him. He wishes he would have waited. The bartender piped in to say people that wait are stupid because they are losing that money. (If you wait, your social security amount increases.) A different guy I know is retired but not going to collect social security until he turns 70. He is not worried about passing away before then because he will be dead and won't care. I plan on waiting until I am 67 (my full retirement age). Who the F knows? The trust fund should be empty right before I become eligible for anything so that should be fun. 😖 I can remember when working for CPA back in 1976 and we had "older" clients in their late 50's who would were scared that SS wouldn't be there when they reached 65. I was 33 at the time and listening to them I just knew it wouldn't be there when I hit 65 - of course I didn't wait that long (see prior post)
|
|
Lizard Queen
Senior Associate
103/2024
Joined: Jan 17, 2011 22:19:13 GMT -5
Posts: 14,659
|
Post by Lizard Queen on Mar 6, 2022 16:46:09 GMT -5
Who the F knows? The trust fund should be empty right before I become eligible for anything so that should be fun. 😖 I can remember when working for CPA back in 1976 and we had "older" clients in their late 50's who would were scared that SS wouldn't be there when they reached 65. I was 33 at the time and listening to them I just knew it wouldn't be there when I hit 65 - of course I didn't wait that long (see prior post) Well, I'm expecting 75% of what I should get, but I'm also expecting they'll change things around then, and who the F knows what those changes will be at this point? Probably be screwed over regardless. I'll cross that bridge when I come to it.
|
|
NoNamePerson
Distinguished Associate
Is There Anybody OUT There?
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 17:03:17 GMT -5
Posts: 25,650
Location: WITNESS PROTECTION
|
Post by NoNamePerson on Mar 6, 2022 16:56:55 GMT -5
I can remember when working for CPA back in 1976 and we had "older" clients in their late 50's who would were scared that SS wouldn't be there when they reached 65. I was 33 at the time and listening to them I just knew it wouldn't be there when I hit 65 - of course I didn't wait that long (see prior post) Well, I'm expecting 75% of what I should get, but I'm also expecting they'll change things around then, and who the F knows what those changes will be at this point? Probably be screwed over regardless. I'll cross that bridge when I come to it. I agree with you. Like I said they keep moving the goal posts. I fell into the group when they changed full benefits at 65 to 66 and however many month on top of it. It was at that point that I just decided to draw at 62 and let the chips fall where they may. They will probably screw with retirements accounts and SS till the cows come home. I keep waiting for them to make the early draw age 65!! Or have they already?? I don't keep up with it now since I've been drawing for 17 years and counting
|
|
|
Post by minnesotapaintlady on Mar 6, 2022 17:12:29 GMT -5
I used to think I would start drawing at 62 and then just invest it since I wouldn't need it, and some money for the kids should I die "young" would be better than nothing, but now I'm thinking I'll hold off and keep drawing the pre-tax accounts down more instead. I'll probably change my mind a half dozen times in the next 9 years before I become eligible.
|
|
giramomma
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Feb 3, 2011 11:25:27 GMT -5
Posts: 21,276
|
Post by giramomma on Mar 6, 2022 17:26:35 GMT -5
One thing at a time. I'm 46, and retirement from my current job can happen in 10 years. I think I could retire with .97 of a pension (iow, retire in less than 10 years), and we'd be OK.
That's what I need to tackle right now, as well as getting a plan together for what I want to do in early retirement. With a minor child at home, I should still work. I'm not sure I should hang it up completely at 56 with a freshman in high school. But, no need for me to work full time and be another cog in the wheel, either.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 19, 2024 10:06:25 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2022 17:28:32 GMT -5
DH and I chose to take at 62. I don't remember what his full benefit age was, but mine was like 67 or so. We felt those $$ could be invested for a higher return. I get the rationale behind requiring the RMD and the taxes on it, but it's a bit frustrating for those of us who are fortunate enough not to need it. We roll it over to our joint brokerage account for reinvestment.
In hindsight, we would have been far better served to avoid the IRA and other tax-favored contributions back in the day. We sacrificed so much quality of life in our younger days in order to save for retirement. In retirement, health issues, basic aging, and Covid have made the $$ basically useless. It's truly hard to find the balance. As a good YM'er I"m not advocating for stupid spending or not planning for retirement. I am saying that no one actually knows what the financial picture, including taxes, will be 30 years down the line.
|
|
buystoys
Junior Associate
Joined: Mar 30, 2012 4:58:12 GMT -5
Posts: 5,650
|
Post by buystoys on Mar 6, 2022 17:45:52 GMT -5
DH and I both ended up retiring early on disability. So we're already taking it in one regard. DH will be at his FRA in another 1 1/2 years, so we'll see if there's any change that happens then. Our biggest blessing since becoming disabled has been Medicare. We live in a black hole for ACA and had only horrible options available. One year we spent almost 45% of our income on medical expenses. Fortunately, we were able to save well during our working years, so have the benefit of having funds available now.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 19, 2024 10:06:25 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2022 17:57:02 GMT -5
I never included SS in my long-term projections, figuring it would be taxed away if I actually took responsibility for building up my own savings. At 61 I retired and by then I added it in to see if I early retirement was an option.
I did NOT file at 62. People in my family live a long time; Mom died at 85 and Dad at 90. I have some relatives who lived past 90. For me FRA was 67. DH died when I was 63 so I started collecting his Survivor benefit, which made the decision to keep delaying much easier. (I wasn't getting a spousal benefit since I wasn't FRA.) At least I was getting something. This coming week I'll get my first payment on my own record, which will be about double what I was getting as a Survivor. I'm 69 but decided to take it now because I figure taxes will only go up given all the spending to mitigate the effects of COVID, and I'll be a target. It's also one more year of SS when I'm NOT taking RMDs from my IRAs.
Filing at 62, in addition to permanently reducing your benefit, also permanently reduces what your survivor, if any, might collect, so that can be an important factor.
According to one article I read, nearly half of baby boomers think that if you take the reduced benefit at 62, it gets magically bumped up at FRA. Nope.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 19, 2024 10:06:25 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2022 18:14:07 GMT -5
At this point DH has outlived almost all of his family except for 2 cousins who are in their late 80's or early 90's. I'm about the age my mother died but much healthier and I don't know anything about the rest of the family. It's such a guessing game with age, genetics, the future of the government etc.
|
|
NoNamePerson
Distinguished Associate
Is There Anybody OUT There?
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 17:03:17 GMT -5
Posts: 25,650
Location: WITNESS PROTECTION
|
Post by NoNamePerson on Mar 6, 2022 18:14:24 GMT -5
I never included SS in my long-term projections, figuring it would be taxed away if I actually took responsibility for building up my own savings. At 61 I retired and by then I added it in to see if I early retirement was an option. I did NOT file at 62. People in my family live a long time; Mom died at 85 and Dad at 90. I have some relatives who lived past 90. For me FRA was 67. DH died when I was 63 so I started collecting his Survivor benefit, which made the decision to keep delaying much easier. (I wasn't getting a spousal benefit since I wasn't FRA.) At least I was getting something. This coming week I'll get my first payment on my own record, which will be about double what I was getting as a Survivor. I'm 69 but decided to take it now because I figure taxes will only go up given all the spending to mitigate the effects of COVID, and I'll be a target. It's also one more year of SS when I'm NOT taking RMDs from my IRAs. Filing at 62, in addition to permanently reducing your benefit, also permanently r educes what your survivor, if any, might collect, so that can be an important factor. According to one article I read, nearly half of baby boomers think that if you take the reduced benefit at 62, it gets magically bumped up at FRA. Nope. My father was dead at 21 and mother at 73! So I am on borrowed time. I have no survivor so not an issue. I was told I would be able to draw widows benefits if my EX died but he'll out live us all And for all I know that may have changed too. I'm fortunate that I had no one else to consider nor was I dependent on anyone else's benefits, insurance, income since I've been on my own for 40 years.
|
|
NoNamePerson
Distinguished Associate
Is There Anybody OUT There?
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 17:03:17 GMT -5
Posts: 25,650
Location: WITNESS PROTECTION
|
Post by NoNamePerson on Mar 6, 2022 18:15:28 GMT -5
At this point DH has outlived almost all of his family except for 2 cousins who are in their late 80's or early 90's. I'm about the age my mother died but much healthier and I don't know anything about the rest of the family. It's such a guessing game with age, genetics, the future of the government etc. More like a crap shoot!!!
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,337
|
Post by Tennesseer on Mar 6, 2022 18:22:34 GMT -5
Took Social Security at 62. I once heard whether you take it at 62 or at 67-70, you will still end up with about the same total dollar amount (at the average death age of 78 for men) taking it at 70 as you would at 62. Just less per month taking it at 62.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 19, 2024 10:06:25 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2022 18:44:25 GMT -5
Took Social Security at 62. I once heard whether you take it at 62 or at 67-70, you will still end up with about the same total dollar amount (at the average death age of 78 for men) taking it at 70 as you would at 62. Just less per month taking it at 62. Yeah, that's the idea behind the reduced amounts at lower ages. The idea is that, on average, you'll collect the same over your lifetime whether it's a smaller amount over a longer period or vice versa. The guessing game is whether you think your life span will be longer or shorter than average.
|
|
TheOtherMe
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 14:40:52 GMT -5
Posts: 27,113
Mini-Profile Name Color: e619e6
|
Post by TheOtherMe on Mar 6, 2022 19:02:43 GMT -5
I wasn't even going to file since I was a federal employee and only had social security taken out on part time jobs. I thought the WEP would reduce it to zero.
SS sent me a letter when I was turning 70 that I should file because it wasn't going to increase unless I was working. So I did.
I have no idea of how it was calculated but SS pays my Medicare premium and I get $91 per month.
|
|
busymom
Distinguished Associate
Why is the rum always gone? Oh...that's why.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 21:09:36 GMT -5
Posts: 28,330
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"https://cdn.nickpic.host/images/IPauJ5.jpg","color":""}
Mini-Profile Name Color: 0D317F
Mini-Profile Text Color: 0D317F
|
Post by busymom on Mar 6, 2022 19:09:32 GMT -5
Unless something unexpected happens, I plan to wait until 70. Women in my family tend to live to be quite old, so it seems to make sense to wait.
|
|
pulmonarymd
Junior Associate
Joined: Feb 12, 2020 17:40:54 GMT -5
Posts: 7,365
Member is Online
|
Post by pulmonarymd on Mar 6, 2022 20:29:36 GMT -5
Someone age 65 can expect to live 17 years on average. There is a significant number of people who live to 90. People underestimate their life expectancy
|
|