Poll:Would you let your funds go to zero for SS?

[calmloki]

No fine planning here - no faith that things will remain as they are, no faith in history predicting the future. We both took SS at 62 - having my heart stop makes me glad to have done so, as it tickles me to get some allowance back from the government. Lacking in faith that SS payout rates or dates are any kind of thing you can count on. In our modest way we keep piling the stash up and playing the game. I think these two guys may just have the right ideas:

Full Service Station (Texas Country Reporter) - YouTube

Chuck Feeney: The Billionaire Who Is Trying To Go Broke - Forbes

For some reason I think they would get along real well.

[jimnjana]

We are leaning towards spending down and putting off SS until at least 67 for DW and then bring it up for an annual decision after that. Spend down for us means selling off one vacation rental and farm land. Using the proceeds to pay down mortgage debt and increase our travel budget. DW TSP account will become our cash reserve and we will convert it to an IRA for easier withdrawals at some point in the next few years. Maybe its primarily more of a portfolio rebalance away from real property.

[calmloki]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimnjana We are leaning towards spending down and putting off SS until at least 67 for DW and then bring it up for an annual decision after that. Spend down for us means selling off one vacation rental and farm land. Using the proceeds to pay down mortgage debt and increase our travel budget. DW TSP account will become our cash reserve and we will convert it to an IRA for easier withdrawals at some point in the next few years. Maybe its primarily more of a portfolio rebalance away from real property.

Yeah, our initial plan called for selling a place per year starting in, oh, 2008. That didn't really work out so well. So we kept renting them. Uncle Mick says: Agile, Mobile, and Hostile. Not too hostile here, but a master at flexi-planning.

[tryan]

Get used to saying "Welcome to Walmart!"

[youbet]

I wouldn't assume my investments would perform at exactly the rate of inflation. That's a wild assumption that has never happened for me.

[foxfirev5]

After 35 years of controlling my own investments I'm a confirmed take it at 62 guy. Flexibility and the desire to leave some to the kids trumps running the balance down. But who knows??

[jimnjana]

Quote:

Originally Posted by calmloki Yeah, our initial plan called for selling a place per year starting in, oh, 2008. That didn't really work out so well. So we kept renting them. Uncle Mick says: Agile, Mobile, and Hostile. Not too hostile here, but a master at flexi-planning.

Flex-planning like it, and practice it. Our old primary home that we couldn't sell is actually the main reason our finances have improved (covers cost of other vacation rental and puts cash in our pocket).

[bamsphd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Running_Man and a need to spend $3,000 per month.

Obviously working on adjusting your "needs" is priority number one.

However, using the given assumptions I voted for:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Running_Man 8) $2,848 and 5.1% withdrawal portfolio 36,000 Age 69

The unfortunate reality with those numbers is that the person is probably eventually going to be dependent on means tested benefits. So spending down is inevitable. Thus there is little reason not to spend it down up front to maximize SS. However, I would not want to spend all the way to ZERO, because everyone needs some kind of emergency/liquidity fund. Without any liquidity it is difficult to take care of emergencies, difficult to take advantage of sales, and generally your cost of living increases because you do not have any flexibility.

[NW-Bound]

Quote:

Originally Posted by calmloki Uncle Mick says: Agile, Mobile, and Hostile. Not too hostile here, but a master at flexi-planning.

I don't think I am ever hostile.

I don't think I will ever need to sell both of my stick homes, but I like my small motorhome. It gives me the security of feeling agile and mobile.

[daylatedollarshort]

I would not spend my savings down. I would either figure out how to live on a ~2% withdrawal rate plus SS or keep working, or some combination of lowering expenses and a part time job.

[REWahoo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NW-Bound I don't think I am ever hostile.

I think maybe you're missing the context of unclemick's frequently used phrase: See Jake Gaither

If you want to win [at investing, especially in individual 'testosterone' stocks], you need to have those attributes - plus significant luck.

[NW-Bound]

Thanks. Never a sport enthusiast, I did not know the origin of that phrase.

For investing, one always needs luck!

And for individual 'testosterone' stocks, yes, one needs to be a bit more aggressive assertive. It's not as passive as index investing, that is certain.

But I do not think attempting a contrarian stock trade as the same as raising one's heart beat by accelerating in a Tesla. Whether one wins or loses, a move of a chess piece is done in coolness and quietude, not like a quarterback block in a cheering stadium.

PS. I have made an edit above, after thinking about it some more. Quite often, we all sensed that a certain market trend was wrong, but we were afraid to act. Examples include the dotcom and housing bubbles, the rise of gold and stock like Apple.

Talk about Apple, I should have shorted the stock when my mother who knew very little about investing told me about how her friend's son piled on to Apple and made a bundle on paper, and that I was not as smart to do the same. This happened right at the apex of the stock price!

[TimSF]

"Would you let your funds go to zero for SS?"

no.

[obgyn65]

To the OP : you may find this graph of interest : http://www.schwab.com/public/file?cm...k_Even.png&cv4

To answer your question, no.

[NW-Bound]

OK, after thinking about this some more, I voted for drawing SS at 62 for this case.

My reasoning is this.

If I delay SS, and totally rely on my stash with a WR of 12%, then I may run out in 5 years in the worst case, using a 50/50 portfolio. That's too short a time for me to react, such as to change my lifestyle or to look for a part-time job.

If I take SS early, then my WR is 5.4%, and in the worst case my stash gets depleted in 16 years. Heck, by that time, I may find out that my spending goes down like most geezers in their late years, just as Bernicke discovered, then it is all good. And chances are that my portfolio will be doing quite all right, not like that worst case, and I will even be cruising.