Interesting SS numbers from FIRECalc

[NanoSour]

Ran the following 2 scenarios and got some surprising results given the conventional wisdom of delaying SS as long as possible.

1) Ran FC with receiving SS at 62 with the numbers from ESPlanner. I believe these are the most accurate numbers given my complete salary history.

2) Ran FC with receiving SS at 70, again with numbers from ESP.

Via the FC Investigate tab, I selected Spending Level given a 99% chance of success. The result was that taking SS at 62 vs 70 led to over $5K additional annual spending. That is a significant difference!

My ER plan is to take SS it at 62. If I make it there.

[Rustward]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NanoSour I believe these are the most accurate numbers given my complete salary history.

More accurate than the ones you get from the Social Security Administration?

It is impossible to have an opinion or comment unless you post the entire scenario. You can post the scenario with *absolute* precision using the "Link To This Set of Data" on the FireCalc results page. Then nobody has to guess about what parameters you entered.

[heeyy_joe]

Being that you are married you also need to take into account your survior benefit for DW before jumping on SS at 62. Just sayin'

[NanoSour]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rustward More accurate than the ones you get from the Social Security Administration? It is impossible to have an opinion or comment unless you post the entire scenario. You can post the scenario with *absolute* precision using the "Link To This Set of Data" on the FireCalc results page. Then nobody has to guess about what parameters you entered.

Didn't know you could do that.

FIRECalc: A different kind of retirement calculator

The age 70 SS is

37,675 (2035)
15,191 (2035)

[NanoSour]

Quote:

Originally Posted by heeyy_joe Being that you are married you also need to take into account your survior benefit for DW before jumping on SS at 62. Just sayin'

DW survivor benefits are included in the calculation. That is one of the many excellent features of ESPlanner. It provides all those numbers for you.

[gauss]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NanoSour Via the FC Investigate tab, I selected Spending Level given a 99% chance of success. The result was that taking SS at 62 vs 70 led to over $5K additional annual spending. That is a significant difference! My ER plan is to take SS it at 62. If I make it there.

But what do you put in for how long to live? The age 70 recommendation really pays off if you live a long time. I currently plan for 102.

-gauss

[NanoSour]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rustward More accurate than the ones you get from the Social Security Administration?

The SSA calculator is that same as ESP. However, most user leave the default setting of "No increase beyond 2011 average US wage" which is really ultra-conservative. As is the SS output number under this scenario.

A more realistic benefit would be to select the "2012 Trustee Report Alternative II" to get a more accurate prediction of your SS based on projected increases in average US wages.

[NanoSour]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gauss But what do you put in for how long to live? The age 70 recommendation really pays off if you live a long time. I currently plan for 102. -gauss

My FC plan was 41 years to age 90. Going longer won't change it as assets are on the upswing.

[gerrym51]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gauss But what do you put in for how long to live? The age 70 recommendation really pays off if you live a long time. I currently plan for 102. -gauss

i plan on having a good time until 90. after 90 i won't be able to do anything anyways

[Katsmeow]

The other day I was playing with FireCalc using a 30 year plan which would take us to 95 for DH and 89 for me. I used the example of DH and I both taking SS at about 62 1/2 (DH already did this). For spending we have variable levels of spending so I did the manual yearly spending. For FireCalc I am assuming that DH and I are both alive for the entire 30 years.

Then I ran the same plan but had me taking SS at 66 1/2. To my surprise, the success percentage went down about 3%.

I also ran the Fidelity retirement planner. I used similar numbers but Fidelity runs the plan to age 92 for DH and age 92 for me and I can put in for expenses how those expenses will vary with time and it assumes that DH dies at 92 so certain expenses don't continue after that. I put in that DH and I both start SS at 62. I then ran that plan and got the result (it actually shows me having a shortfall of about $70,000 at age 90 using the most conservative model).

I then ran the same Fidelity but changed my SS to start at 66. When I did that it showed that at 92 (the end of the plan) I still had about $75,000 left over.

So for Firecalc I did worse taking SS at 66 and for Fidelity I did better taking SS at 66.

[foxfirev5]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gerrym51 i plan on having a good time until 90. after 90 i won't be able to do anything anyways

I am not counting on doing much after 85 or so. I used to think that about age 55 but now that I'm past that age I've moved the bar.
Seriously though, I still plan on age 62 for SS since I'm a control freak who wants to keep my investments in my hands as long as possible. Can I do better than the built in increase in SS benefits by delaying? Maybe, maybe not, but I'll take my chances. The answer for each of us is not as easy as some would make it out to be.

[NanoSour]

Quote:

Originally Posted by foxfirev5 I am not counting on doing much after 85 or so. I used to think that about age 55 but now that I'm past that age I've moved the bar. Seriously though, I still plan on age 62 for SS since I'm a control freak who wants to keep my investments in my hands as long as possible. Can I do better than the built in increase in SS benefits by delaying? Maybe, maybe not, but I'll take my chances. The answer for each of us is not as easy as some would make it out to be.

Never thought of it as a "control" issue, but that a great way to look at it.

[gerrym51]

try this calculator


Retirement calculator: How much should I save for retirement? - MSN Money

[gerrym51]

Quote:

Originally Posted by foxfirev5 I am not counting on doing much after 85 or so. I used to think that about age 55 but now that I'm past that age I've moved the bar. Seriously though, I still plan on age 62 for SS since I'm a control freak who wants to keep my investments in my hands as long as possible. Can I do better than the built in increase in SS benefits by delaying? Maybe, maybe not, but I'll take my chances. The answer for each of us is not as easy as some would make it out to be.

i turned 62 in february and although i did not need to i took it anyway at 62

[NanoSour]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gerrym51 i turned 62 in february and although i did not need to i took it anyway at 62

From what I'm seeing sounds like a good choice.

Thanks for the calculator link. My primary retirement calculator is ESPlanner. I bought the full version, but there is a free version here.

Home | ESPlannerBasic

[gerrym51]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NanoSour From what I'm seeing sounds like a good choice. Thanks for the calculator link. My primary retirement calculator is ESPlanner. I bought the full version, but there is a free version here. Home | ESPlannerBasic

i like this calculator(the msn one) because it always says i'm good until 95

[NanoSour]

Mirror, Mirror on the wall....

[SumDay]

gerrym51 said:

Quote:

try this calculator

Yowsa, I wish those #'s were accurate. I'd love to leave that much to my kids! Very different results than FireCalc, Quicken's Lifetime Planner, and Fidelity results.

[ERD50]

From the OP:

Quote:

Originally Posted by NanoSour Ran the following 2 scenarios and got some surprising results given the conventional wisdom of delaying SS as long as possible. ..... Via the FC Investigate tab, I selected Spending Level given a 99% chance of success. The result was that taking SS at 62 vs 70 led to over $5K additional annual spending. That is a significant difference! My ER plan is to take SS it at 62. If I make it there.

I think I can explain the 'surprise' versus 'conventional wisdom' of delaying SS as long as possible.

The typical FIRECALC failures are the scenarios where the portfolio takes a dive in the first few years of retirement. The withdraws compound this, and the shrunken portfolio never recovers. So taking SS early will lessen the withdraws, and temper the impact on the portfolio. The larger portfolio then participates in following recoveries.

However.... in real life versus static models, we can choose to take SS at any point along the way. So if one hits a downturn in the first few years of retirement, one can decide to take SS at that time to soften this. If things are going fairly well, one can delay, and will gain some valuable longevity insurance.

There are several examples of posters doing exactly this during the recent downturns, and it would appear to be the prudent thing to do.

So maybe we can rephrase this to say that the 'conventional wisdom' is to delay SS as long as possible - where 'as long as possible' means not having to dip into your portfolio too much w/o that SS income.

-ERD50

[gerrym51]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SumDay gerrym51 said: Yowsa, I wish those #'s were accurate. I'd love to leave that much to my kids! Very different results than FireCalc, Quicken's Lifetime Planner, and Fidelity results.

i think they are accurate-assuming you use the correct amount of income you need and amount of inflation. i use 3 percent. i think its the needed income that causes problems.

it also puts all your income streams-except SS-in one big lump.you sort of have to figure what total percentage return you are getting