Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 05-20-2015, 06:22 PM   #241
Dryer sheet aficionado
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 43
I can't leave SS to my sons and my wife, if she survives me will get whatever she gets, not a concern. Longevity wise, my fathers side lived to their late 60's, my mothers side into their 90's. My fathers side smoked, my mothers side, no one did. I never did, but there is more to it than that. At about 62 now, I feel OK. Who knows.


Sent from my iPhone using Early Retirement Forum
__________________

__________________
43WorkYears 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 05-20-2015, 06:26 PM   #242
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,424
You can't leave SS but if you spend SS funds, you may have more of your savings left over.
__________________

__________________
explanade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2015, 06:31 PM   #243
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Colorado Mountains
Posts: 2,146
I don't see how anyone can say "break even at 22 years". Every situation is different with not only how you invest money, but also what you/your SO will receive for SS. I am receiving about $13k per year on my late wife's account. If I take my SS before 70, that $13k disappears. My break even will be much shorter than 22 years.
__________________
Hermit is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2015, 07:11 PM   #244
gone traveling
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,248
Quote:
Originally Posted by 43WorkYears View Post
I can't leave SS to my sons and my wife, if she survives me will get whatever she gets, not a concern. Longevity wise, my fathers side lived to their late 60's, my mothers side into their 90's. My fathers side smoked, my mothers side, no one did. I never did, but there is more to it than that. At about 62 now, I feel OK. Who knows.


Sent from my iPhone using Early Retirement Forum
Jeanne Calment was a French supercentenarian who has the longest confirmed human lifespan on record.... smoked from age 21 to 117.

It is not clear cut thing. But I would say odds of smoking and living 122 years are not high so I do not recommend it
BTW she looked pretty young at age 62. So looking into mirror may tell you something. And I recommend lot of wine, olive oil and a chocolate to go in her footsteps of her lifestyle.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeanne_Calment

http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2010-07/54702820.jpg
__________________
eta2020 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2015, 07:33 PM   #245
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 5,414
Quote:
Originally Posted by youbet View Post
The 22 years, of course, is given his assumptions about returns and inflation and without consideration to the sequence of returns issue. A nice analysis for sure, but we should be careful to understand that it's 22 years plus or minus a bunch depending on returns, inflation and their sequence. Any particular individual may have a result less than or greater than the 22 years.
there is no sequence risk since you are not spending down the way he is figuring . you are taking ss instead so the comparison is really what you are getting , which is the ss checks and the 6% average return on a 50/50 mix .

kind of a one sided view i guess.
__________________
mathjak107 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2015, 08:16 PM   #246
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 5,327
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
here are the numbers as worked up by michael kitces.

22 years to break even if spending down a 50/50 portfolio to delay.

https://www.kitces.com/blog/how-dela...money-can-buy/
If a retiree wants to maximize longevity insurance this would be the way to go. However, some of us want to minimize portfolio depletion at any given point in time during retirement, then maybe sooner wins out. We all have different priorities. Or if one thinks future benefits and tax rates may change and be less favorable, then that seems to favor an earlier benefit age. I think it is pretty much a given that something has to change with SS, given the current funding situation. To me that is a hard reality to ignore when one is considering all the options and crunching all the numbers.

Maybe I've missed them, but I've never read any posts here about getting tested for the FOX-O gene. I think that might actually be pretty useful:

"The CAU team studied 380+ centenarians, more than 600 people in their 90s, and more than 700 60-75 year olds to determine how prevalent these gene variations were. They found that not only were certain FOXO3A variants very common in 90 year olds, they were even more common in 100 year olds, emphasizing the importance of genetics for aging well."

http://singularityhub.com/2010/02/19...t-foxo3a-gene/
__________________
Even clouds seem bright and breezy, 'Cause the livin' is free and easy, See the rat race in a new way, Like you're wakin' up to a new day (Dr. Tarr and Professor Fether lyrics, Alan Parsons Project, based on an EA Poe story)
daylatedollarshort is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2015, 08:32 PM   #247
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
RunningBum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,195
Quote:
Originally Posted by rayvt View Post
The other thing that matters is the shape of the cash flow. No money now but more later, vs. some money now but less later. It does you no good to have more money later if you are in bad health and can't enjoy it.
People use this as a reason to take SS early, but as others have said on here, money is fungible. As long as you have enough of other funds, you can defer SS and still spend more money in the earlier years by tapping your savings a bit more. Then when you take SS, it can account for a greater % of your needs in your later years. If SS would account for more than 100% of your later year needs you probably wouldn't want to defer.
__________________
RunningBum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2015, 10:01 AM   #248
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 731
Anybody here modeling the scenario based on the 'rumors' that in 2033 SS benefits will be cut by 23%?
http://www.heritage.org/research/rep...lvency-in-2033

And does that factor into your decision to take SS early?
__________________
BBQ-Nut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2015, 10:12 AM   #249
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
travelover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by BBQ-Nut View Post
Anybody here modeling the scenario based on the 'rumors' that in 2033 SS benefits will be cut by 23%?
Social Security Trustees Report: Unfunded Liability and Projected Insolvency

And does that factor into your decision to take SS early?
I get all my information from the Heritage Foundation.
__________________
Yes, I have achieved work / life balance.
travelover is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2015, 10:23 AM   #250
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,709
Quote:
Originally Posted by BBQ-Nut View Post
Anybody here modeling the scenario based on the 'rumors' that in 2033 SS benefits will be cut by 23%?
Social Security Trustees Report: Unfunded Liability and Projected Insolvency

And does that factor into your decision to take SS early?
That's my break even year!
__________________
Living well is the best revenge!
Retired @ 52 in 2005
marko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2015, 10:34 AM   #251
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 731
Quote:
Originally Posted by travelover View Post
I get all my information from the Heritage Foundation.
Haha - ok - so just one of several links pointing to this....issue.

If people are modeling/hoping for status quo, then isn't this built into that?
__________________
BBQ-Nut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2015, 11:08 AM   #252
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 13,290
Quote:
Originally Posted by BBQ-Nut View Post
Anybody here modeling the scenario based on the 'rumors' that in 2033 SS benefits will be cut by 23%?
Social Security Trustees Report: Unfunded Liability and Projected Insolvency

And does that factor into your decision to take SS early?

I think someone needs to do the math.... but I bet they cut current benefits also... so both the higher at 70 benefits and the lower at 62 benefits are cut... it probably makes the break even later, but I bet there is still a break even age....


BTW, I do not believe there will be a 23% cut cliff... IOW, one year they are paying 100% and the next year only 77%... they will fix the problem sooner one way or another...
__________________
Texas Proud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2015, 11:13 AM   #253
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Big_Hitter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: In the fairway
Posts: 4,099
the reason for the drastic cliff in payments is that the trust fund is only sufficient to cover a year or two of benefit payments sans contributions


2033 (or 2029 depending on which study you are looking at) is still a LONG way away, I wouldn't be surprised if we see cuts sooner than that (or later, hopefully) - lots of variables
__________________
Swing hard, look up
Big_Hitter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2015, 11:21 AM   #254
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Big_Hitter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: In the fairway
Posts: 4,099
"The theoretical combined OASDI trust funds have a projected depletion date of 2033, unchanged from last year’s report. After the depletion of reserves, continuing tax income would be sufficient to pay 77 percent of scheduled benefits in 2033 and 72 percent in 2088. "
__________________
Swing hard, look up
Big_Hitter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2015, 11:21 AM   #255
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Big_Hitter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: In the fairway
Posts: 4,099
so um yeah, I'll prolly take mine at 62 if it's still allowed by then (2026)
__________________
Swing hard, look up
Big_Hitter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2015, 11:28 AM   #256
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 5,327
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big_Hitter View Post
"The theoretical combined OASDI trust funds have a projected depletion date of 2033, unchanged from last year’s report. After the depletion of reserves, continuing tax income would be sufficient to pay 77 percent of scheduled benefits in 2033 and 72 percent in 2088. "
I don't understand all the financial "expert" articles where this issue is not even mentioned. A true business analysis would take a probability tree approach or something similar and factor reduced benefits in as a real possibility, since that is actually what is funded currently and as such a non-zero probability outcome.

As a project manager I would not have planned a very long term project on a 100% budget if only 77% of the project was actually funded.
__________________
Even clouds seem bright and breezy, 'Cause the livin' is free and easy, See the rat race in a new way, Like you're wakin' up to a new day (Dr. Tarr and Professor Fether lyrics, Alan Parsons Project, based on an EA Poe story)
daylatedollarshort is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2015, 11:38 AM   #257
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Big_Hitter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: In the fairway
Posts: 4,099
Quote:
Originally Posted by daylatedollarshort View Post
I don't understand all the financial "expert" articles where this issue is not even mentioned. A true business analysis would take a probability tree approach or something similar and factor reduced benefits in as a real possibility, since that is actually what is funded currently and as such a non-zero probability outcome.

As a project manager I would not have planned a very long term project on a 100% budget if only 77% of the project was actually funded.
I've mentioned it several times in threads like this - guess I need to write something up...
__________________
Swing hard, look up
Big_Hitter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2015, 12:13 PM   #258
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Placerville
Posts: 300
I see taking SS early as a way to increase my estate value. I'm able to either;
A. Invest my early SS payments if I don't need the money. All of which is inheritable if I don't spend it.
B. Spend my early SS payments and leave my investments untouched to continue and grow. Again inheritable if I don't spend it.

Personally, I prefer to count my birds in my hand, not those in the bush. A promise by the government for a future SS benefit is susceptible to revisions as I haven't actually received a benefit yet, so logic dictates, I haven't actually lost anything yet. (Congressmen and Senators think just this way!) Whereas, a benefit I'm currently receiving is harder to take away.

I am willing to bank on the sure thing, taking the SS early, locking in my claim to the payment by actually receiving it and either spending it to shelter my own current investments or to invest along with my current investments if I don't need the money at the time.

Playing the 'waiting' game, banking on a gamble that SS will be around, let alone grow at a 8% annual rate by delaying is tantamount to banking on a gamble that the stock market is going to average 10% growth just because it has in past years. Only now the government has your money.

Speaking of which; The government does not consider your SS account your money. Oh no!! That's THEIR money that they decide how to distribute. If they decide to means-test, and I think there is a strong chance they will someday, then folks like us are screwed.
__________________
skipro33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2015, 01:06 PM   #259
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
ivinsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,201
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYEXPAT View Post
I am in a similar situation, but with a 10 y/o and 7 week old to boot.
I plan to take SS in 6 mos. at age 62 (suspend at 66 and restart at 70) My number is similar to yours but my Wife's is wildly different (She will only collect survivor benefits (28 years younger) starting at 67. She will also participate in the family benefit, once the oldest hits 18.

My benefit 951,808 dead at 94 (location to be determined)

Family benefit 96,886 child 1
261,145 child 2
125,775 Spouse portion of family benefit

Spouse Survivor bene 3,008,415 till age 100 (all numbers Cola'd at 2.5%)


Total 4,444,031

I find these #'s crazy as according to SS, I had only put in a little over 100k

Just goes to prove my theory," that sometimes it's better to think with the little brain"!
Your family is definitely an extreme example, but shows why some areas of SS simply scream for reform and change...I don't how any reasonable person could think this was appropriate. That said, if it's there for you, no reason you shouldn't take it.
__________________
ivinsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2015, 01:17 PM   #260
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Mulligan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 7,384
Quote:
Originally Posted by ivinsfan View Post
Your family is definitely an extreme example, but shows why some areas of SS simply scream for reform and change...I don't how any reasonable person could think this was appropriate. That said, if it's there for you, no reason you shouldn't take it.

Its the law so it is what it is. And this may only be me, but it appears to be just one step above government dropping money from a helicopter.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
__________________

__________________
Mulligan 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
When Should You Take Social Security? wanaberetiree FIRE and Money 20 09-02-2014 02:56 PM
when should you take social security article veremchuka FIRE and Money 117 02-21-2011 06:04 PM
why you should ALWAYS take SS as soon as you can endthefed FIRE and Money 69 06-05-2010 09:38 AM
Iraq and the Kansas Tornado. You should be angry. We all should. newguy88 Other topics 16 05-08-2007 08:20 AM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:53 PM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.