Early Retirement & Financial Independence Community

Early Retirement & Financial Independence Community (http://www.early-retirement.org/forums/)
-   FIRE and Money (http://www.early-retirement.org/forums/f28/)
-   -   25% of SS recipients sorry they took payments early... (http://www.early-retirement.org/forums/f28/25-of-ss-recipients-sorry-they-took-payments-early-82568.html)

LARS 07-04-2016 07:01 PM

25% of SS recipients sorry they took payments early...
 
From the article: "Well, a new survey says that, given the chance, a quarter of Social Security recipients would take it later than they did."

Also survey found future SS recipients are trending toward taking payments later than 62.




Survey shows second-guessing of Social Security choices - The Portland Press Herald / Maine Sunday Telegram

Just_Steve 07-04-2016 07:06 PM

So........75% are happy they took it early.

bclover 07-04-2016 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just_Steve (Post 1752125)
So........75% are happy they took it early.

;)
works for me

Music Lover 07-04-2016 07:49 PM

From the article:

Quote:

Of future retirees who plan to draw Social Security, only 29 percent plan to draw these benefits early.
Perhaps those 29% should talk to some of the 77% that are happy they took it early...

Senator 07-04-2016 07:52 PM

I think many people, myself included, think they will wait until age 70. It is very easy to say you will wait, when you have no other choice.

An interesting question to myself, at age 62, is when I will be taking SS. At 56 the answer is "I will wait".

UpAnchor 07-04-2016 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Music Lover (Post 1752135)
Perhaps those 29% should talk to some of the 77% that are happy they took it early...


Or better yet, the 25% who wish they hadn't...

RunningBum 07-04-2016 09:11 PM

That article confuses me. It says the study surveyed 1000 people age 50 and older. That means at least some of the people aren't of age to take SS yet. Certainly people who aren't even eligible for SS aren't going to regret a decision they haven't had to commit to or act upon, right? And don't tell me that they didn't include those in the numbers, because they say 77% of those retired 10 years or more would not change and 69% of those recently retired would not change, so it would take a larger number of the pre-retireds not regretting that future decision to bring that number back to 23% regretting their decision.


Odd that the people retired longer, and thus closer to the break even point, seem less regretful of the decision to take SS early.

Music Lover 07-04-2016 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RunningBum (Post 1752156)
That article confuses me. It says the study surveyed 1000 people age 50 and older. That means at least some of the people aren't of age to take SS yet. Certainly people who aren't even eligible for SS aren't going to regret a decision they haven't had to commit to or act upon, right? And don't tell me that they didn't include those in the numbers, because they say 77% of those retired 10 years or more would not change and 69% of those recently retired would not change, so it would take a larger number of the pre-retireds not regretting that future decision to bring that number back to 23% regretting their decision.

Perhaps there were different questions asked depending on age, and we only saw some of the results....the 23% and 77% could have belonged together (100%), and the 69% belonged with a 31% demographic that wasn't mentioned.

audreyh1 07-04-2016 10:02 PM

Also - the poll is skewed by people still alive.

alaska55 07-04-2016 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by audreyh1 (Post 1752171)
Also - the poll is skewed by people still alive.

+1

Bamaman 07-04-2016 10:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just_Steve (Post 1752125)
So........75% are happy they took it early.

Most of the 75% had no choice, as they had to eat.

Ever read how few of the U.S. population has almost nothing saved up for retirement?

I was bound and determined at a young age that Alpo wasn't going to be in my diet.

Music Lover 07-04-2016 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by audreyh1 (Post 1752171)
Also - the poll is skewed by people still alive.

+2

gayl 07-04-2016 10:58 PM

I'm confused:
Quote:

In 2016 the average age that men began receiving Social Security is higher than it was in 2014 (60.5 vs. 62.3).
So that means they're on SSDI (no age requirement) or widows benefits (eligible at 60) not SSA (eligible at 62) therefore not applicable. Another bad article IMHO

Sunset 07-04-2016 11:54 PM

Lots of folks cannot do math, or understand money.
We've all seen the that person, who spends all or more than all their money and still expects to have a great retirement in 10 years.

So one of those folks who took SS at 62, because he had no savings and could get cash right away, when told he could be getting $300 more per month if he had waited until 65, will naturally say, he regrets taking it early.

markelp 07-05-2016 04:04 AM

A little searching finds much more information including the fact that this is funded by "one of the largest and strongest diversified insurance and financial services organizations in the U.S." (Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company). Perhaps they have an interest in gathering and spreading information that would drive people to purchase their products...

https://www.nationwide.com/about-us/...l-security.jsp
https://nationwidefinancial.com/medi...FM-15550AO.pdf

608 respondents are either recent or 10+ year retirees.

Slide 6 in the above PDF gets into the "why didn't you start to collect SS later" with the top answer: "Retired earlier than planned"

Slides 23+ are all about Financial Advisors. Specific questions about who has an advisor, how long and how they take their advisor's advice. Slide 23 shows that less than 1/3 use an FA. The rest of the slides reflect this with a caution that there are "less than 100 responses" about FAs.

Methodology: The 2016 Social Security Study was conducted online within the U.S. by Harris Poll on behalf of the Nationwide Retirement Institute between February 16 and February 23. Respondents comprised 909 U.S. adults aged 50 or older who are either retired or plan to retire in the next 10 years and collecting Social Security or planning to. Data are weighted where necessary by age by gender, race/ethnicity, region, education, household income, retirement status, and propensity to be online to bring them in line with their actual proportions in the population.

DFW_M5 07-05-2016 06:43 AM

I wonder how many on this site would say they took it too early? Any survey gurus want to put up that poll.

ShokWaveRider 07-05-2016 06:51 AM

Is there a way to calculate "how much one will get" for every year between 62 & 66 (FRA),I have not looked? I know I can see what I get at 62, 66 & 70.

Taxman59 07-05-2016 06:56 AM

A 58 y/o cousin was asking me about being retired. She is FI, but not necessarily emotionally ready (she is following the Boglehead website). She asked me what my plans were regarding SSI. I told her that my plan is to wait to age 70, though I have 5 years before any decision is needed. My family history says if I make it past 70, I should make it to the mid 90s, but who knows what will happen with $ and health over the next 13 years. With my cousin, genetics says living past 75 is very unlikely (for both her and her husband), recent health events, however, tell her that 62 is the right answer, though again, she has 4 more years to see what may happen.

Dawg52 07-05-2016 07:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShokWaveRider (Post 1752211)
Is there a way to calculate "how much one will get" for every year between 62 & 66 (FRA),I have not looked? I know I can see what I get at 62, 66 & 70.

I think it works out to be roughly 8% more per year.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Taxman59 (Post 1752215)
A 58 y/o cousin was asking me about being retired. She is FI, but not necessarily emotionally ready (she is following the Boglehead website). She asked me what my plans were regarding SSI. I told her that my plan is to wait to age 70, though I have 5 years before any decision is needed. My family history says if I make it past 70, I should make it to the mid 90s, but who knows what will happen with $ and health over the next 13 years. With my cousin, genetics says living past 75 is very unlikely (for both her and her husband), recent health events, however, tell her that 62 is the right answer, though again, she has 4 more years to see what may happen.

I'm less than a month away from the magic 62 number. Five years ago I would have said I would probably take it around 65 give or take a few months. Now I'm looking at waiting only until early next year. I've looked at all the possible scenarios like most and feel it works for me. But waiting a few months buys me a little more time to think about it.;)

ShokWaveRider 07-05-2016 07:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dawg52 (Post 1752219)
I'm less than a month away from the magic 62 number. Five years ago I would have said I would probably take it around 65 give or take a few months. Now I'm looking at waiting only until early next year. I've looked at all the possible scenarios like most and feel it works for me. But waiting a few months buys me a little more time to think about it.;)

I thought that too. But because of ACA MAGI limitation, I decided to wait. I would not qualify for a subsidy if I took it at 62 and thus would give any additional income to an insurance company anyway.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:54 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.