For example let's say a SS monthly amount of 750.00 / month at 62 and 1000.00 / month at 66.
In four years you would have received 12 X 4 X 750.00 = $36,000.00.
The $250.00 extra would take 12 YEARS to recover that $36,000 or by age 78 !
This is without interest. Now if the 36,000 returned a 5% interest at age 78 it would be worth ~ $60,000 +. It is a no brainer.
And remember that under current law, you can do a “full reset” of SS up to age 70.
Pay back everything you’ve received (no interest charges) and start over.
Someone mentioned that if you take SS at 62, it reduces benefits for the rest of your life. However, if you pay all the money back at 65, you can move into the higher bracket at 65.
Take the money at 62? Why. Do the math.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I did the math. I lost $350 a month by not waiting until I was 66.
And I am not sorry that I did not wait. I was emotionally burned out from 25 years as a Social Services Case Worker for Alabama and then Georgia. I had worked in Child Protective Services and Adult Protective Services (one year each during my tenures) and saw abuses that still give me nightmares.
I retired because it was time for me to retire. My family lives into their late nineties/early hundreds. Assuming I don’t end up on the receiving end of someone else’s death-wish, I have another 44 or so years to enjoy retirement.
Happy Retirement is the one that makes sense for you, no matter what any mathematician ciphers out.
“It is a no brainer”
Your right, it’s a no brainer. Plus, what’s to say they won’t push out the retirement age before you get to 66.
In my case, the wife was already on SS based on her own earnings and when I started collecting at 62, at which time they based her check on 1/2 of my amount and she gets significantly more now as well.
You left out the medical benefits. I believe if you start collecting at 62, you also go off your own health insurance and go on government health insurance. For someone in their sixties, health insurance is often well over $1000/month. If that person is buying their own health insurance, that’s a huge savings.
Agreed. Are the “experts” who say “wait” just fools? Or are they paid shills for the feds?
“It is a no brainer.”
It is indeed. I have been to multiple retirement seminars and every one said that unless you plan to work a regular job till you are 66 you are a fool not to get the lower benefits at 62.
Take the money at 62? Why. Do the math. How much money do yu collect in those four years, a lot.The Social Security Admin website has a calculator to figure that math for you. They show you any advantage or disadvantage, in dollars, of retiring early (at 62).
Great post. Agreed, nobody should wait one minute longer than they have to in order to start recouping at least some of the money they dumped down the government toilet over their lifetime.
Get some before the Democrat “base” constituency (the losers, bums, and parasites) gobble it all up.
DEFINITELY start collecting at 62.
Depends on if you want to keep working or not. If you take the 4 years between age 62 and 66, if you have a half decent job, you will make far more than that $60k. Also add to the calculation how long you expect to live. The higher benefits at full retirement will catch up on what you passed on at 62 eventually -- something like 15 years on average as I recall. Most people do make it that long, and have higher income each year as a result.
I think it's foolish to look at it as seeing how far ahead you can get on the system before you croak. If I decide I want to keep working and make a heck of a lot more money than I can collect in benefits, that's what I will do. If I know my time is limited or working becomes too much for me, I'll do the other and live with the lower income.
But to just say automatically that you will take it at 62 just because you can may not be the best decision for everyone. It's not a 'no-brainer.' People need to think about it.
btt
Because millions of people die by the time their 66? lol....