Do you feel lucky?

[LiveBelowMeans]

Warning morbid topic. I thought this data from the Social Security Administration was interesting. Latest data is from 2014, but hopefully you get the idea. https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/STATS/table4c6.html#fn1

Data gives you the odds of dying in the next year. What struck me was for those people delaying taking social security from 62 to 70, 10 % of the women and 15% of the men will never collect a penny. One more year anyone?

 

[walkinwood]

I don't get this obsession with "never collecting a penny". The heirs maybe upset, but it makes no difference to the person who is dead.

The inverse - that is people who outlive the actuarial tables - will be alive and benefit from the increased payments.

There are good reasons to take SS early, but this imho, this isn't one of them.

 

[foxfirev5]

Here we go again.

 

[Red Badger]

Nope. Retired at 60 so I could start collecting a couple of modest pensions. Will start drawing SS at 62. DW will draw spousal benefit near FRA (she's a couple years older so start dates aren't very far apart). She was a SAHM, so no SS other than spousal.

Once I figured out that I couldn't buy extra time, I decided how I wanted to spend my remaining time. And I wasn't going to spend it w*rking.

 

[someguy]

I can't believe someone hasn't replied, "well do you, punk?"

https://youtu.be/8Xjr2hnOHiM?t=125

 

[CardsFan]

All these recent threads about when to collect SS caused me to input my data into FireCalc, just to get a basis.

At a 100% success rate, for 30 more years, and using FRA as the norm, and only the highest SS, our SWR changes by:
Age 62: -5%
Age 70: +.6%

Since we currently spend less than 60% of the SWR, our answer is, it just doesn't matter. Collecting earlier could provide more to the heirs, if you die younger. Waiting to 70 might give a few more years to the survivor, but the odds are high that there will be more left.

FYI, we are both 62, so 30 years is 92.

So, the current plan is FRA (unless we change our minds)

 

[Spanky]

10 % of the women and 15% of the men will never collect a penny.

The SSA would like to see the percentage to go up.

 

[braumeister]

My 8 great-grandparents died an average age of 65
My 4 grandparents died at an average age of 78
My 2 parents died at an average age of 86

As the longevity of each generation has increased, I feel that I stand a reasonable chance of living past the breakeven point. Consequently, my decision was to collect my Social Security benefit starting at age 70.

Apart from that, I'll offer another anecdote.

I accompanied my mom to a doctor's appointment when she was 89. The doc was the chatty sort, and he asked her how long she expected to live. She immediately replied "96". She said her father had lived to 96, and she was a lot like him. Sure enough, she died at 96 and 5 months, exactly the same age as her father. So maybe attitude has something to do with it. Who knows?

 

[flyingaway]

Claiming social security has been discussed many many times. I guess if we live to 62, my wife will claim at that age, I will wait until some later undetermined year.

 

[candrew]

I can't believe someone hasn't replied, "well do you, punk?"

I gotsta know.....

 

[joeea]

What struck me was for those people delaying taking social security from 62 to 70, 10 % of the women and 15% of the men will never collect a penny.

Imagine how embarrassed they feel!

 

[RunningBum]

I don't get this obsession with "never collecting a penny". The heirs maybe upset, but it makes no difference to the person who is dead.

The inverse - that is people who outlive the actuarial tables - will be alive and benefit from the increased payments.

There are good reasons to take SS early, but this imho, this isn't one of them.

+1