Poll:Are You Expecting Social Security?

[Independent]

With all the comments on any thread referencing SS reductions, I thought a poll made sense.

Pick the percent that's closest to your number. If your best guess is 90%, pick 100%. If your best guess is 85%, pick 75%.

I intend that "expecting" is your best guess. Most of us will make plans that have some cushion for the possibility for actual being worse than expected.

So my best guess is that I'll average about 85% over my eligible years. But my saving/spending plan is conservative enough that I won't starve even if I end up with just 25%.

If you think you'll lose some of your benefit due to some sort of means testing, use the reduced benefit as your estimate.

(I wish the poll allowed for a couple more choices on plans vs. expected and on means testing. Maybe I need another poll.)

 

[ziggy29]

If the three options are "yes, I'll get what's promised to me today," "yes, but not as much as currently expected" and "no, not at all," put me down for option #2.

 

[Texas Proud]

From what I read.... it is about a 10% to 15% reduction... so I went with the 75%...

 

[teejayevans]

you'll get 100% if your >50, but you may be paying taxes on 100% despite your income level, or the increases will be less because of the redoing of the way they calculate the inflation. I can almost guarantee there will be some slight of hand involved.
SS I'm not worried about, Medicare is the problem.
TJ

 

[scrabbler1]

To keep this an apples-to-apples comparison, I am assuming I would not change the age at which I would file for SS benefits even if the FRA is raised. I chose 25% reduction (I am 48) because I am assuming there will be some change to the benefit formula compared to today which will reduce my current projected benefit. This could be anything from price indexing to raising the FRA to averaging more than the current 35 years in the initial PIA.

 

[73ss454]

I'm 62 and have not pulled the trigger on SS as of yet. I expect to get my full benefit when I do but I'm concerned about how much the government will be taking back. Just another trick by the folks in Washington to make it look like they haven't touched our benefit.

 

[Marathoner]

I'm 33 and planning as though we won't get any SS.

As teejayevans mentioned, my biggest concern is Medicare. My husband has a chronic health condition that makes him pretty much uninsurable on the individual market.

 

[Texas Proud]

you'll get 100% if your >50, but you may be paying taxes on 100% despite your income level, or the increases will be less because of the redoing of the way they calculate the inflation. I can almost guarantee there will be some slight of hand involved.
SS I'm not worried about, Medicare is the problem.
TJ

Not true.... some of the proposals will only protect if you are over 55...

 

[steelyman]

Although I will be eligible for SS (have earned enough credits), because most of my working career has been for an employer that did not participate, I'm expecting a substantial reduction before any future government takebacks occur. But, like teejayevans, my greater concern is Medicare. I do not (never have) factored SS in my retirement financial calculations.

 

[bamsphd]

Am I an optimist or a pessimist for thinking that once we are both retired our net-SS will probably just cover all our medicare "cost sharing" and "supplemental-insurance" charges?

 

[Coolius]

I am still vacillating between taking SS when I hit the minimum age of 62, or waiting for a little longer to increase the monthly checks.

On one hand, something tells me to take whatever money I get at 62 and run, as there is no guarantee the Government will not change the rules in midstream, even for those over 60. I actually am leaning toward this alternative ( I really do NOT trust those morons in WDC )

But, on the other hand, there is always the attraction of getting more and this becomes more pronounced if I should live beyond 81. I have sufficient resources in taxable assets to draw down while waiting till FRA if needed, and this also has the benefit of lowering my taxes.

The real clincher is whether I trust the Feds or not. And the answer is a resounding NO!!!

Guess I answered my own question.....

 

[chinaco]

We, like many other LBYM people of this forum saved and invested.

I expect to get it. All of it. If it turns out that we do not.... We will be ok. But I paid into that damn thing and expect to get it!!

If we do not.... some politicians got some splainin' to do! About half the voting population is 50 yo or older.

Those that raid SS will likely be put out of office. If they survive it, they will probably have to be a saint otherwise...

Even tinkering with the CPI and downgrading it is probably going to be criticized. As we all know the CPI-U is used for the COLA which is less than the CPI-E which represents retiree costs more accurately.

Now if they use a chained CPI based on Elderly spending they might get that past!

I saw a republican on the news last night. Their target is medical. They are gunning for medicare, medicaid, and the new health care reform bill.

 

[braumeister]

I decided to simply take the Social Security trustees at their word.
I expect 100% of my benefit until 2036, then 75% of that amount until 2085.
After 2085, I don't know what I'll get, but it probably won't be important. The publicity value of being the oldest living human will probably get me a nice stipend in interview fees.

 

[GregLee]

Over 60 and expecting to get 100%. Actually, I am 69 and have been getting 100% (minus income tax on 85%) of SS for a year and a half now. I'm not expecting a further reduction, other than perhaps the 85% taxable portion going higher. (I wonder if congress would have the nerve to charge FICA tax on SS income.)

 

[MichaelB]

Need more options.

 

[bbbamI]

We're expecting 100% of our SS (ages 53 and 57), however I only use 50% in our retirement calculations.

 

[Midpack]

If the three options are "yes, I'll get what's promised to me today," "yes, but not as much as currently expected" and "no, not at all," put me down for option #2.

Me too...

 

[palomalou]

Certainly hope the majority in my age group are correct, since they expect 100%. This is case where I'd LOVE to be wrong!

 

[rescueme]

Am I an optimist or a pessimist...?

Neither - you're a realist ...

 

[jimnjana]

I decided to simply take the Social Security trustees at their word.
I expect 100% of my benefit until 2036, then 75% of that amount until 2085.
After 2085, I don't know what I'll get, but it probably won't be important. The publicity value of being the oldest living human will probably get me a nice stipend in interview fees.

I think your expectations are probably pretty dead on. I do expect at some point before 2036 that politicians finally address Social Security in a realistic manner. Just read a factoid that the first person to live to 150 has already been born, maybe that lucky person is you.

 

[obgyn65]

I am 46 and expect 75%, maybe 50%.

 

[Tadpole]

I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the [-]Bomb[/-]whatever present the future brings.

 

[FUEGO]

Currently age 31 and hoping to FIRE by 35. I voted 50%. I imagine what we get will be different (and lower) than what we are "promised" today. I imagine as a wealthier than average person I will get a disproportionately lower SS payment since it will likely be means tested or taxed based on means somehow.

Since I will have roughly 30-35 years before I am eligible for SS, it is a very small part of my planning because I have to acquire sufficient resources to carry me for the next 3+ decades regardless of what SS benefits I ultimately get.

 

[FreeAtLast]

I am using the 75% figure to do my planning. It just does not seem like I can count on 100% of it.

 

[powerplay]

I'm not eligible for SS so I am expecting zero. Most of my career I did not pay into SS so I don't have the minimum number of credits.