Posted on 12/31/2017 7:23:49 AM PST by SeekAndFind
What is an "sr" salesperson?
And have they really had the No. 1 spot in "job-likeability" or "job-security" in nine of the past ten quarters?
It seems to me that a civil servant would probably have the highest job-security (he didn't specify "in the private sector").
Regards,
Consequences?
I’m not taking unlawful benefits for myself.
I also consider retirement as a concept to be foolish. It’s fine if someone can meet all their own needs and they are okay with shouldering all their own needs, but it’s a bad idea to expect retirement.
Families should take care of their own. Congregations should take care of those who have no one and cannot take care of themselves. People have the right to ask other persons for help (voluntarily given from their own means).
It isn’t the federal government’s enumerated power to be concerned if I starve while living in a box under a bridge.
It’s time to start preparing myself for this eventuality. I’m going to hold off as long as I can.
For practical purposes I kissed that money goodbye long ago however, I think my loving wife will be able to use it after my death (her family genetics lean towards longevity), so in preparation, articles such as this are very helpful. I’ve recently downloaded a social security for dummies book and I’m going to start educating myself a little bit more than I currently am on Social Security.
My sister-in-law came over a week or so ago and was talking about social security and what she’s doing and I understood about one-third what she was talking about. So that’s my realization point - that it’s time to start figuring it out.
The shame of it all is having to figure it out and possibly miss something. Some folks cant afford to miss anything yet the burden of “discovery” is on them... you would think that things like this and taxes would be simplified to the point where you don’t really have to spend a lot of time educating yourself so you won’t get ripped off the second time around.
It's like an insurance policy. Ask your auto or homeowners insurance company for a refund if you've had no accidents or your house suffered no damage.
I took mine at age 62, and I filed for it exactly 3months before my 62nd birthday so I would get paid when I turned 62. I figured I had 4 extra years of payments by taking 85% of what I was entitled to. I’m 63 1/2 now and we have been enjoying the extra income. Since my husband is nearly 7 years older than me and a cancer survivor with a quadruple bypass, I will probably outlive him, and will collect his SS as his survivor because it’s larger than what I collect anyway.
I feel the same way, and am hence taking only the lawful benefits, as specified by the Social Security Administration. I would wager that no one here at Free Republic would ever advocate taking anything but their lawful benefits.
But I suspect that you attach some unusual meaning to the word "lawful." Would you please elucidate?
Regards,
I heard the 18 month death after retirement story at Generous (not) Electric in 1988. I was working 56 hour weeks then at a high stress job. I quit shortly after, killing my self for the company for what?
“Take the money! Anyone who Waits for 8 years without an ironclad guarantee from God that they’re going to live to make up what they will have lost if they died the day before the 70th birthday is nuts.
Even if you don’t need the money take it and invested the stock market historically goes up two days out of every three and the average return is 8%. No one with a brain ever refuses money unless it is a critical tax situation which in most cases this would not be since most States and the government exempt social security income at least partially.”
I agree 100 %. Both my wife and I took it at 62 and now 15 years later are just approaching break even point. Mother in
Law adamantly refused to take it until full retirement age. Said she didnt need it. Begged her to take it and build portfolio. No dice. Died at 73. She was screwed as were heirs.
I had a job related heart attack at age 52. I was peace officer and got a nice medical retirement with only 10% taxable. I took my SS at 62. I had enough credits from before I was in the peace officer system.
I had a 5-way by-pass in 2002 and didn’t expect to I’ve past 65. Now I’m 71. But I don’t regret taking the lower amount earlier. My wife is 61 and she will probably wait.
“No dice. Died at 73. She was screwed as were heirs.”
—
Since when do people making financial decisions that seem best for their needs have to worry about their heirs?
It was her decision and her money.
.
Yeah, and in 1967, I overheard two strangers in a NY subway who claimed that...
Read the article at the link below:
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-18952037
This belief appears to be based largely upon fallacious thinking.
For instance: Did you know that the majority people who drink a bottle of whiskey a day all the way up to their 90th birthday live to be over 90? Obviously, drinking a bottle a day increases your life expectancy!
Regards,
This is mentioned in the article, but only briefly, and is the main reason one should consider waiting as long as possible to take SS.
It’s about the only inflation-protected income stream available that isn’t affected by market forces.
If you take, say, $2000 a month at age 62, and inflation is 6% that year, the next year your SS payment will be raised approx. 6%, to $2,120.
But if you wait until age 70, your SS payment will be $3,500 even if there’s no inflation during that eight years. However, if inflation averages 5% between age 62 and 66, your payout will go up accordingly. (I’m not certain how it’s handled from 62 to 70, however.) The result will be around a $4200 monthly payment.
Even at $3500, if you now get a six percent inflation rate, your next year’s monthly check will rise to $3,710, an increase of $210 instead of $120. And at $4200, your monthly payout would rise to $4450, an increase of $250.
So, besides getting a significantly larger monthly payout that doesn’t depend on how your IRA performs, it will increase by inflation each year, something your IRA doesn’t always do either.
People seem to equate retiring with needing to take SS. If you can’t live without SS payments coming in, all the more reason that you should consider working longer because you will build in better protection against inflation in your later years.
Well we do what we can. No one can plan for an
unexpected layoff health crisis or family issue or how
other family members will help. Life isn’t always fair.
My wife had a wonderful professional job and career as did I
she went on maternity leave and never returned after
full time mother role because our child ended up low end
Of ability autistic . A conservative estimate is 450K in
lost after tax wages over 18 years. She is still 7+ years away
from collecting.
My 70yo sister who has struggled with mental and other health issues
was given a life estate to compensate for other considerations given
to siblings and while she made it to full retirement until the recent death of another sibling refused to move out of a modest home she didn’t need that has 3 owners left (2 died) now worth at least 900K and maybe more. 2 brothers were both laid off for 1.5 yrs in the crisis that
emerged after (D) took Congress in 06 and could have used the $
But between SS, SSI, a small pension, small 401k Whole life
annuity and downsizing / moving out of blue state suburban Home
now worth 600K we won’t starve. Others don’t have it that good
Senior ie experienced/older
Someone who can close a deal and not
just for short term gains but keeping clients
Long Term
“It was her decision and her money.”
Of course it was. I was just pointing out some of the practical effects of these decisions. If you don’t give a shit about your kids or anyone else..especially if “you don’t need it”...then that greatly simplifies things. My mother in law was not that way in any respect but just didn’t see the ramifications.
SS was originally meant to be a stopgap to keep people from becoming destitute - not to provide a comfortable retirement. Then it grew. And grew. And so did the SS taxes.
Well, they’ve basically figured out a way to get it back to where it started despite the protestations about SS ‘going insolvent’, haven’t they?
I’m talking about the $1 deduction for every $2 you earn over a certain amount - meaning that if you’d like to use your SS to help supplement your older years, you need to stop working, basically.
Lovely. I’ve put more $$$ into it than I’ll ever see, and then I’ll have to retire completely (ie not work) to see SOME of it come back.
But if you don’t have enough saved to comfortably retire (yet), then you have to keep working - and not take your SS.
The angles on this scam keep getting more interesting ...
Bookmark as well.
But, if I am earning 85,000.00 to 115,000.00 per year working only 1600 hours per year (many weeks I’m working 80+ hours per week), then why should I retire at 62 just to get 1000/month more in SS money? Makes more sense to earn 10,000.00 per month as long as practical. And travel between jobs now.
Two of my closest Childhood Friends died before reaching the age of 62.
Both had worked their entire lives and each probably “invested” over $250,000 into SS and Medicare throughout their lives.
They got nothing. One of them was Married and his Wife got $255 to help pay for the Flowers at his Funeral.
Her SS Check got a slight bump as the surviving Spouse of about $100 a Month since she earned close to what her Late Husband earned.
I made the decision to take my Benefit at 62 since I was diagnosed with Leukemia in my early 50’s. Made that decision easy since the odds are I won’t make the “break even” point.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.