Posted on 11/16/2019 3:43:24 PM PST by Openurmind
One of the most important decisions you'll have to make as you approach retirement is when to start Social Security benefits. The soonest you can begin claiming is 62, which remains the most popular age to start. It's not necessarily the wrong choice -- you'll still get a sizable amount of money over your lifetime -- but it might not be the best option if you're interested in maximizing your benefits. Here's a closer look at how the age you begin Social Security affects the size of your checks.
(Excerpt) Read more at fool.com ...
The work I did was pretty physical and I could no longer do it. From what I understand, because of my age, they didn’t insist I do something else. You will need your doctors certification of your inability to do what you’re accustomed to doing. Being old and broken down, as we are, helps. When do you turn 62, have you talked to Social Security yet? If not, get the process going now.
The government is counting on, and needs for people to wait until later in their retirement years to collect SS.
There are millions of people who don’t take their SS benefits and wait until 65 or 67 or older, HOPING to get more in their checks when they do finally collect SS.
But, the government keeps YOUR benefits if you die before collecting SS. If you wait till 65 and die in between 62 and 65, the government ‘gets lucky’ with your benefits. If you wait until 67 and die before that age, the government will have kept 5 years of SS, and all of your SS ‘contributions’ you made all your working life. If you wait until 70, the government will have gotten lucky with all of your lifetime contributions to SS. Spouses and kids may receive what was coming to you, if they survive you, but, YOU will not have gotten back what you expected from SS.
You may get more at an age greater than 62, but the government is counting on YOU leaving the Earth prior to you getting your benefits.
The government gets to keep billions of dollars each year from those that died prior to collection. Congress has tried for many years to increase the SS benefits age to at least 67 and many have mentioned 70. The later they can move it to, the more the government gets to keep from those that died prior to getting their due benefits.
SS is NOT YOURS and the government wants you to die before you can get any benefits. And, the government also wants you to die before you have gotten back what you paid into the program.
Yet, there are people who NEVER PAID into the system who are getting YOUR SS money, including millions of non-citizens; aka: illegal aliens. Imagine if an insurance company got to do the same with money people paid into their life insurance, and the money was kept after they die.
You sound like someone who is definitely going to survive for quite a while.
God Bless.
It depends on a lot of factors.
I am retired but have chosen to wait until 70 to collect.
The reason:
—I can live reasonably well without the SS benefit for now
—It will maximize my wife’s benefit
—Both my parents are still alive (at 90+) and my family has long-life genes. The “breakeven” number for waiting to retire at 70 is 85.
I could get run over by a truck tomorrow so my plan could be a total failure, but statistics say I am making the right call for my situation.
You are a very fortunate man, to still have your parents.
I will try to adopt your optimism. I have a brother who is seven years younger. He always wishes me well, thinking that as long as I am okay, he has years left.
I think I have been the second oldest male in my extended family for about thirty years. My alcoholic father died when he was 44. I am actually quite surprised to find myself 71. We all hang by a slender thread.
I retired 3 years ago at 68 when retirement age was still 65. The extra has been quite nice. However my un-Vaxed age group seems to be living longer then the following Vaxed age groups who are going to have to retire at 70 to max-out their SS if they should live so long.
There are even some who think that the minimum age to take Social Security was raised along with the normal retirement age. It wasn't. When I pointed this out to a person I know, he went out the next day and filed for benefits. His situation left no doubt about how to best meet his needs and he expressed appreciation for my tip.
That’s exactly what my spreadsheet crunching showed — breakeven is 81-82. If you believe you’ll live well past that, delay receiving. Assumes the system will be solvent and keep pace with inflation.
Change the Law???
.
I can’t remember saying that.
I think the lines
Are crossed.
Congress or G-d can make Social Security worthless to you in a stroke.
A: 62.
Bad math. Doesn’t use a discount rate at all.
Exactly.
I will take the very first dime Congress offers. They will screw me, but later....
Amen. By the time you take any of that into proper consideration, the answer for almost everyone is, “As early as possible”.
All these articles are financially and politically simplistic propoganda trying to get people to work longer against their clear financial interests.
Except in your example you under estimate the 5 year increase. It’s basically an 8% increase in benefit each year from 62-70,so if it’s 2000 at 62 then it’s about 2800 at 67.Lots if wrong info in this thread. If you have questions call the SSA, or go to their website SSA.gov and see your own benefit info. To calculate payback time on delayed benefit add up the early payment amount and divide it by the increase you would get That’s the number of months it would take to break even.
No- check with your tax guy.
The earned income limit is not high. Read the link I supplies in the post you replied to.
Bookmark for me too. Age 61 and trying to decide.
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.