The Genealogy Thread

[LarryS]

Doesn't current income play a role in how much you can collect? I thought there was a income limit above which your benefit gets reduced.

yes there is...and if i ever started to work at something and got paid, i would have to call SS and see what the consequences are.

[dannyj]

Larry if you don’t mind my asking, do you have taxes withheld from your benefit?

[quahaug]

Doesn't current income play a role in how much you can collect? I thought there was a income limit above which your benefit gets reduced.

Yes it does....for the stiffs that still have to work to make ends meet in old age.

Ask Dancer for details on what it's like.

And Warren Buffet too....or maybe T. Boone Pickens.

My hero, T. Boone. Made his first million at 65 years old. Look at him now. Gives me a little hope so I can get out of bed in the morning.

[LarryS]

Larry if you don’t mind my asking, do you have taxes withheld from your benefit?

yes but its not alot. It gets direct deposited.....I have no idea how much....i dont spend it...it will be invested when it accumulates to 20k in a year.....for me i crunched the numbers and frommy past performance in conservsative investing.....its best gfor me to take it early.

Its just a false belief that everyone who takes SS at their first chance is needy for money. If anything I am needy for control of my money....and SS id MY money. If I could take a lump sum...I would. I could do more with it

[dannyj]

Yes I agree. I’m just trying to understand the taxation part of the benefit. Apparently IRA and 401k income do not count towards a reduction in benefit like wage income can. But, once one goes over a very modest total income threshold the SS benefit gets taxed up to 85% from 50%.

Also, they don’t withhold automatically, you have to ask them to.

[mickeycrimm]

Not very creative mickey. But you know I wrote the undeniable truth about you and this thread.

Every now and then I try to put myself in your position of being old, fat, with no family (ever, that is) no money, a beater for a car (which explains no pictures) having alcoholic blood, a worn out hand, no dental plan (ever) and having never done a productive thing in your life. And you know what? I black out

Wrong again, cow breath. I put up a picture of my car last August when I was down in Idaho for the eclipse.

[Rob.Singer]

And we know that thing is yours exactly how?

Actually, this would be right up your two-bit alley either way.

That's quite a tent mickey. I had the same one when I was 16.

[Rob.Singer]

It's all justification for taking the money early because you have to. When you go to any knowledgeable financial advisor they will always, again, barring illness or a bad financial position, tell you it's a big mistake if you don't wait. Of course there's all kinds of differing situations out there, but simply taking early SS just because you want it in your hands instead of the govt's, in very unwise. And if you're healthy, why wouldn't you expect to live to at least 85 or 90 or even more? Especially baby boomers, who are the first generation to understand you can do something about living longer.

thats another lie Its because I can do more with80-100 k than the govt can. The govt is not good at "investing". They are not good at holding my money.

they want people like you that have no investing discipline to let them keep your money as long as they can. The system is bankrupt...of course they want everyone to wait as long as they can, and maybe they will drop dead.

People like you who dont have a clue about investing and are prone to get shafted in investment scams are the ones that cry that its better for the govt to keep your money as long as they can.

I can see your point.

but for the average joe, with average investing skills......more likely then not before they die at age 76(on average) they will have come out ahead by taking the money early.

especially if they didnt need it to live.

You're not getting it. No financial planner would agree that what you're doing is smart. And you're right--this stuff isn't my bag so I pay a professional to give me advice and invest for us. When I turned 61 I went over my options with him, and he immediately told me how there's a lot of do-it-your-selfers out there and that basically all of them get it wrong and start SS too early. There's a boatload of reasons also.

Not something you'll ever want to agree with because it's got to do with you cutting yourself short in the long run. And do you really believe the words "I can handle my money better than the govt can" haven't been spoken by a lot of people who live by banging their heads against the wall?

[mickeycrimm]

It's all justification for taking the money early because you have to. When you go to any knowledgeable financial advisor they will always, again, barring illness or a bad financial position, tell you it's a big mistake if you don't wait. Of course there's all kinds of differing situations out there, but simply taking early SS just because you want it in your hands instead of the govt's, in very unwise. And if you're healthy, why wouldn't you expect to live to at least 85 or 90 or even more? Especially baby boomers, who are the first generation to understand you can do something about living longer.

thats another lie Its because I can do more with80-100 k than the govt can. The govt is not good at "investing". They are not good at holding my money.

they want people like you that have no investing discipline to let them keep your money as long as they can. The system is bankrupt...of course they want everyone to wait as long as they can, and maybe they will drop dead.

People like you who dont have a clue about investing and are prone to get shafted in investment scams are the ones that cry that its better for the govt to keep your money as long as they can.

I can see your point.

but for the average joe, with average investing skills......more likely then not before they die at age 76(on average) they will have come out ahead by taking the money early.

especially if they didnt need it to live.

You're not getting it. No financial planner would agree that what you're doing is smart. And you're right--this stuff isn't my bag so I pay a professional to give me advice and invest for us. When I turned 61 I went over my options with him, and he immediately told me how there's a lot of do-it-your-selfers out there and that basically all of them get it wrong and start SS too early. There's a boatload of reasons also.

Not something you'll ever want to agree with because it's got to do with you cutting yourself short in the long run. And do you really believe the words "I can handle my money better than the govt can" haven't been spoken by a lot of people who live by banging their heads against the wall?

Warren Buffet says fuck financial planners. They cost money and are not needed.

[Alan Mendelson]

Suze Orman says take the money as soon as you can, including your pension. There's one financial planner, Rob.

[mickeycrimm]

And we know that thing is yours exactly how?

Actually, this would be right up your two-bit alley either way.

That's quite a tent mickey. I had the same one when I was 16.

Your posting from the library, right? Prove that computer you are typing on is yours, idiot. My car is a hell of a lot newer than Alan's. Why don't you rag HIS ass about it, fuckface.

With tents I'm all about easy setup and tear down. I'll be sleeping inside it while you are still setting up a big ass sloppy tent, dumazzz. Fuck, what a stupid ass.

[Deech]

What is the $$$ difference between waiting until you are 65 or 67, if you don`t mind my asking?

If LarryS does not mind I will give some input as I am going through this issue myself.

Regarding Social Security, the minimum age is 62 (without waivers) and the maximum benefit age to collect is 70. You can start to collect after 70 but you will not gain any additional benefit (and actually lose money because you did not start at 70).

The Full Retirement Age (FRA) is roughly 66 1/2 years. The amount you can collect does increase every year between 62 and 70. Using the Social Security website; if you were to receive $1,300 /month at FRA, the minimum amount at age 62 is less 26.7% or roughly $953/month. If you wait until 70, the maximum is an additional above FRA by 29% which is roughly $1,681/month.

To answer your question, at 65 the amount is $1,184/month (less 9%) from FRA. At 67 the amount is $1,369/month (5.3% increase)

The amount a person can receive from Social Security is based on an individual's top 35 wage earning years (or so).

From a gambling perspective; for males the breakeven point of collecting at 66 1/2 versus 62 is roughly age 79. Between 70 and 62 it is just over 80 years old. For women it is slightly higher.

Final note (thought), some individuals will take the money at age 62 due to finance or health (based on the numbers above). Those who think that taking Social security money early saves them from withdrawing 401K money (for me that would be true) what is the new breakeven point on that non withdrawal at 5% (taking money at age 62)? It jumps up to age 91.

The rules are constantly changing. It is fun to play with the numbers. Obviously, there is no single correct answer on when to withdraw your money, as long as you start by age 70.

Good info Deech
I still have a half dozen years before I can start taking it early, which is what I plan to do. For me it just seems to not make sense to wait due to that catch up / break even point of what, 17 years? And isn’t it true that pushing collection back just by months let alone years will increase your payments? Lastly, should one (younger than you) consider SSA solvency when making the decision to collect early?

Yes, while I used three distinct age levels, the social security payment goes up each month you wait to file. I know that between 66 1/2 and 70 it goes up roughly .7% per month or roughly 28 percent by the age of 70.

While I still stand by the breakeven point of 17 or 18 years for accepting social security payments (between 62, 66 1/2, and 70 years of age) LarryS threw in the curveball (appropriately so) about generating income on taking early payments. Yes, I have looked at this and if an individual believes that they are savvy enough to return 5% per year on taking the money at age 62, the breakeven is age 85 for 62 versus 66 1/2 and age 90 for 62 versus 70.

As Regnis stated, you also have to consider taxes. Taxes slightly favors taking the money early (when reviewing the breakeven number) as the difference between monthly payments will be smaller (more taxes on a bigger payout).

Being old fashioned, I was going to wait until 70 years old to collect, but these numbers are interesting. Especially, when you consider the stock market has averaged 7.75% gain per year since 1921. But, most of us are older and can't afford the risk of a 38 percent drop like what occurred in 2008.

The beauty of this conversation is that there is no absolute correct answer. Some individuals want the best payout from age 70 years old. Others want the money at age 62 to invest (or have the belief that the system may go broke, I personally do not believe this) or need the money now.

I have 2 1/2 years before I have to defer withdrawals. I honestly do not know what I will do. For me, the math, at that time, will be the driving force.

[MisterV]

I'll start collecting when I retire or reach 70, whichever occurs first.

[LarryS]

Alot of people dread the thought of their death,or that the average life expectancy of men in the USA is 76. I would love to think I will live to past 85 which would make my decision to take early SS to just start to be a financial mis-step. But I will take that chance. If I hear people tell me that I made a bad decision to take SS at 62...that would mean I am 85 ..I will take that chance of saying singer was right. I will save the money for about 8 years because I have other money to have fun with. And as i get closer to my death...in about 8 years i will have a quarter mil from SS that i can play with....for a few years.

I have been in healthcare for all mylife....and I have seen perfectly healthy people get that first chink in their armor ...diabetes, hypertension, mini stroke, broken hip, parkinsonism, cancer. organ failure, .....and an old body doesnt recover like it used to...and it becomes a slipery slope of deterioration, a cascade of other diseases and conditions ensue in a relatively short period.
I dont know how many people I have treated who said//"i am not used to this...i never needed a doctor for the first 65 years of my life....now I have 4 different doctors"

Seeingthis first hand, and being able to calculate the break even point.....which Deech did with more exacting skill.....for me....it was a no brainer to take the money and run.......while I am still well enough to "run".

At 85 the decision to take early SS just starts to be a bad decision.

Since men usually go before the woman....I would rather have my wife have an extra lump sum in the bank at the time of my death. I would rather enjoy the money myself as well before I kick the bucket. Maybe go on a cruise at the expense of the early withrawl investment profit as the money sat working for me.

[Deech]

"If I hear people tell me that I made a bad decision to take SS at 62...that would mean I am 85...I will take that chance of saying singer was right."

Either this is a win/win and/or the beginning of the apocalypse.

[Bill Yung]

"If I hear people tell me that I made a bad decision to take SS at 62...that would mean I am 85...I will take that chance of saying singer was right."

Either this is a win/win and/or the beginning of the apocalypse.

There are benefits either way. Ie, can't really do the wrong thing here. The reason for setting it up this way. Ergo, a bunch of fools who still try to beat the system.