Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Another article on delaying SS
Old 06-13-2007, 07:38 AM   #1
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
REWahoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Texas Hill Country
Posts: 42,117
Another article on delaying SS

Biding your time: Why it makes sense to delay your Social Security benefits

Not a very comprehensive piece since it only looks at the income side and ignores possible tax and surviving spouse benefits. One recommendation really caught my eye:

"The best plan is to keep working until age 70. That way, you can both delay taking benefits and avoid tapping into your savings,"

Great idea!
__________________

__________________
Numbers is hard

When I hit 70, it hit back

Retired in 2005 at age 58, no pension
REWahoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 06-13-2007, 07:45 AM   #2
Moderator
bssc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 9,930
At the last MegaCorp retirement seminar, two of the people sitting next to me said that working until they die was their plan. According to this, they only need to work until they are 70
__________________

__________________
bssc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2007, 08:25 AM   #3
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 206
In his example Mary makes more than Peter but Peter gets 8 years more retirement. I'll take that chance!
__________________
I'm trying to find myself.* Have you seen me anywhere today?
Mysto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2007, 08:55 AM   #4
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Houston
Posts: 2,155
Quote:
Originally Posted by REWahoo View Post
"The best plan is to keep working until age 70. That way, you can both delay taking benefits and avoid tapping into your savings,"

Great idea!
I'm sure you're not being sarcastic. It's too bad that SS benefits stop increasing after age 70, otherwise...
__________________
Sam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2007, 09:21 AM   #5
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 961
This may have been posted in another conversation, but has anyone run the numbers, through Firecalc for example to see if delaying SS to late 60's or 70's improves portfolio survivability?

Thanks,
Alec
__________________
ats5g is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2007, 09:44 AM   #6
Recycles dryer sheets
pfpelican's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 229
please search on 'delaying s' ... then stand back
__________________
Old Guys Rule
pfpelican is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2007, 09:47 AM   #7
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
FIRE'd@51's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,317
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam View Post
It's too bad that SS benefits stop increasing after age 70, otherwise...
Yup, especially with all the immortals on this forum who would delay SS even later and end up never collecting - a painless way to fix SS
__________________
FIRE'd@51 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2007, 09:53 AM   #8
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
REWahoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Texas Hill Country
Posts: 42,117
Quote:
Originally Posted by FIRE'd@51 View Post
Yup, especially with all the immortals on this forum who would delay SS even later and end up never collecting - a painless way to fix SS
Hey! Who are you calling immoral!!??
__________________
Numbers is hard

When I hit 70, it hit back

Retired in 2005 at age 58, no pension
REWahoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2007, 09:56 AM   #9
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Houston
Posts: 2,155
Quote:
Originally Posted by FIRE'd@51 View Post
Yup, especially with all the immortals on this forum who would delay SS even later and end up never collecting - a painless way to fix SS
Oh no! What if they change their mind now. You're ruining it for the "few of us".
__________________
Sam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2007, 10:48 AM   #10
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
cute fuzzy bunny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Losing my whump
Posts: 22,697
Quote:
Originally Posted by ats5g View Post
This may have been posted in another conversation, but has anyone run the numbers, through Firecalc for example to see if delaying SS to late 60's or 70's improves portfolio survivability?

Oh yes.

Any income stream injected into a firecalc ER plan helps survivability immensely by reducing withdrawals dollar for dollar. ESRBobs book explores this in great detail, although largely looking at using part time work and other income sources/expense offsets instead of SS income.

It depends on how "old" you are when you do the firecalc run.

If you're in your 40's or 50's, Firecalc indicates that taking SS early causes enough beneficial offset for you to take a higher withdrawal rate starting from your current age, "knowing" you have an income stream coming along that will help some of the runs from going below zero.

If you wait and do the run/decision right at 60-62, the appearance of the income streams is so close that the larger, slightly later one produces better numbers, especially for people with very small portfolios.

So I guess the answer to your question is "it depends".
__________________

__________________
Be fearful when others are greedy, and greedy when others are fearful. Just another form of "buy low, sell high" for those who have trouble with things. This rule is not universal. Do not buy a 1973 Pinto because everyone else is afraid of it.
cute fuzzy bunny is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Good Article in Today's NY Times tomz Health and Early Retirement 15 06-07-2007 12:17 PM
DIESEL article in FPA Journal magellan_nh FIRE and Money 5 09-26-2006 10:27 AM
Marketwatch Article on Withdrawal Strategies JLP FIRE and Money 11 04-26-2006 08:55 AM
Newsweek article on retirement tangomonster FIRE and Money 24 04-11-2006 08:55 PM
Interesting article in New York Times Traveler Other topics 17 05-19-2004 05:21 AM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:20 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.