Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-09-2020, 08:09 PM   #21
Dryer sheet aficionado
JillPill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 28
Turned 54 this week. I work as a housing counselor with seniors (people 62 and older) who are homeowners- they are my main client base. Mostly blue collar in their working days, some white collar. The vast majority - 60-70% have no other income than Social Security in their retirement.

I'll give you a canary in the coal mine response - you don't want to live in a country that does not fund Social Security as it was set up. You don't want to see what that America looks like.

I'll give you my political answer too. We spend more than 2 billion dollars a week in our military adventures in the Middle East. We *have* the money to fully fund Social Security, in spades. Don't let anyone convince you otherwise.

Yes. I expect Social Security to be there when I retire.
JillPill 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 02-09-2020, 08:35 PM   #22
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Issaquah
Posts: 155
I expect SS to be fully funded when I retire. I am 53 and will be able to FIRE without SS when I'm 55. I look at SS as an annuity to fund Long Term Health Care as a worst case scenario. But, regardless, politicians aren't stupid enough to let SS flounder. Old folks are the ones that vote. SS funding won't get solved until the last minute since no politician has the vision to solve future problems. Its only when they are forced to vote to save their jobs will they provide the necessary funds to make it solvent.
JackJester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2020, 08:44 PM   #23
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 6,679
I am 56 and have been living just fine off my taxable investments for the last 11 years. I consider SS to be one of my 3 "reinforcements," with unfettered access to my tIRA and my frozen company pension the other 2, available at various times starting at age 59.5.


If somehow SS isn't there or gets reduced by the time I am old enough to be at FRA (age 67), I will still have the other 2 reinforcements ready to supplement my already good financial situation.
__________________
Retired in late 2008 at age 45. Cashed in company stock, bought a lot of shares in a big bond fund and am living nicely off its dividends. IRA, SS, and a pension await me at age 60 and later. No kids, no debts.

"I want my money working for me instead of me working for my money!"
scrabbler1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2020, 09:03 PM   #24
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: SoCal
Posts: 353
50 here and retired. I don't count on SS in my budget assuming it will not be here when I collect SS. If I do get SS then it will be part of "blow that dough"
targatom2019 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2020, 09:49 PM   #25
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 78
I do not think it's wise to consider SS as part of retirement at my age, unless something about what has been going on in Washington leads you to believe our Congress can do anything the protect it. Deficit is growing. Interest on our debt is becoming a larger and larger percentage of the budget every year. Here's a fun calculator that can tell you how much you are likely to get if the current situation continues.

How Old Will You Be When Social Security's Funds Run Out? | Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget
2lhasas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2020, 10:09 PM   #26
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
USGrant1962's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: DC area
Posts: 2,464
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2lhasas View Post
I do not think it's wise to consider SS as part of retirement at my age, unless something about what has been going on in Washington leads you to believe our Congress can do anything the protect it. Deficit is growing. Interest on our debt is becoming a larger and larger percentage of the budget every year. Here's a fun calculator that can tell you how much you are likely to get if the current situation continues.

How Old Will You Be When Social Security's Funds Run Out? | Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget
As your link shows, a 20% cut is the WORST case. Yearly SS tax income covers ~80% of benefits.

To OP, a 20% haircut is reasonable for planning, but ignoring SS means you will work longer than necessary. Please do that to fund MY SS check!
__________________
FI and Semi-ER March 24, 2017
Consulting to stay engaged

"All models are wrong, some are useful." - George Box
There is always a well-known solution to every human problem: neat, plausible, and wrong.” - H.L. Mencken
USGrant1962 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2020, 10:44 PM   #27
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
rk911's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: DuPage County IL
Posts: 2,697
we weren't, at least not much. that was a contributing factor to our investment strategy and wealth building.
__________________
Rich
Ham Radio, Sport Pilot, RVer
FIRE: 8/11/2005, age 55y,1d
Dispatcher, then shift supv, then administrator for a regional 9-1-1 call center
rk911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2020, 02:10 AM   #28
Full time employment: Posting here.
Focus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 640
Quote:
Originally Posted by JillPill View Post
We *have* the money to fully fund Social Security, in spades. Don't let anyone convince you otherwise.
Absolutely. People are playing into certain politicians' hands when they publicly announce they're expecting to receive a huge benefit cut or not get any payout at all. It's not as if there aren't any workable solutions out there, like the Social Security 2100 Act: Here’s what Congress may do to fix Social Security (CNBC)
__________________
-
"Wealth consists not in having great possessions, but in having few wants."
--Epictetus
Focus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2020, 04:32 AM   #29
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 296
Social Security will "be there" for the next 50 years.
It would be "political suicide" of any politician suggesting SS will "STOP" abruptly.

Now, there will be gradual changes, some probably to begin within the next 5 years, to keep SS viable in the long term. This is inevitable.

I believe these changes will include the following:

1) Increase the age at which one can BEGIN to collect SS. Increase the age from 62 to 62.5 ; 63 ; 63.5 etc. until finally , perhaps 25 years from now, you CANNOT BEGIN to collect SS until age 65. This will force people to work until at least age 65. Less early retirement.

2) Gradual increases in SS payroll taxes. Self explanatory. Will need to be done.

3) Slowly decrease benefits over time.

A combination of the above three actions, although not popular, if done gradually, could be SOLD by the politicians as "This is what we GOTTA do."

As an aside MEDICARE is a much more immediate concern.
MrLoco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2020, 04:48 AM   #30
Full time employment: Posting here.
BeachOrCity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 889
No one knows.

So one should plan on that money being at risk.

Most likely you will get some or most of it. You may be all of it. Very Small chance you will get none if it.

Just like life itself. You can’t count on anything for sure.
BeachOrCity is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2020, 06:16 AM   #31
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 112
I turn 38 in April and take this approach.

As of today I assume that I will get 50% of whatever my benefit would be. That said, I do not factor it into my planning. As others have said, I think there is too much risk for politicians to "do away" with social security. Strictly from a behavioral point of view it doesn't appear we are anywhere close to actually fixing it in the short to intermediate term. I suspect politicians won't get serious about "fixing it" for another 10 years or so. By that point I'll be almost 50 and part of the group of constituents that Washington does not want to anger. So there is a pretty good chance benefits will be available for me in some capacity.

Without knowing what that looks like, I can't really plan for it. So by assuming 50% benefits at some point, I know there may be found money in my retirment plan. But as I said I treat it as found money and don't account for it in my formal planning today. But I do cross my fingers and hope it's there in 30 years.
Klubbie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2020, 06:46 AM   #32
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by DawgMan View Post

There are worst plans in the world... just plan on SS as found money. But, at the same time, if you believe it will be there, you effectively could make an argument to "blow the dough" a little more aggressively up until then.

What say you?
We were fortunate enough to have other financial options as a backup, such as Military retirement/Combat disability, that we never factored in SS as something we "depend on to survive." Right off the bat, we set ourselves up to be able to cover all of our fixed living expenses without it. So for us it's treated as additional fun money when/if we get it! I am afraid though that the vast majority does count on SS to substantially supplement their retirement expenses, which I am sure its solvency is a very real concern for them.

With that, I don't think that the gov't will allow for SS to become "insolvent" either. I do think that we are in a pickle and something has to be done soon. Perhaps start by raising both the payroll deduction % for the employee and employer and substantially increase the SS wage base? idk if that's the perfect solution either, but to be honest, I see more of an issue with our Medicare system than with SS. Medicare is by far and away a way bigger problem we have to solve first and quickly.
__________________
"Financial Independence happens the day that you have enough money to walk away from your job and do whatever, whenever you want!"
NotYourAverageJones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2020, 06:48 AM   #33
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Crownsville
Posts: 3,695
When I run my retirement scenarios, I do plan for SS being there. However I also run another set of numbers, assuming no SS whatsoever, just to see how much of an impact there would be.

And surprisingly, not that much. In most instances, it does significantly affect my chances of retiring in any given target year. For instance, according to Firecalc, I could retire this year, with a withdrawal of $80K per year, and have a 93.9% chance of success. Assuming no SS, that would drop to 78.8%. I'm shooting for a 95% chance of success, although 93.9% would get me close enough to be comfortable, if I was truly ready to retire.

If there was no SS at all, I'd have to cut back to $70K per year, if I wanted a 93.9% chance of success. Or, if I wanted to work a bit longer, and really wanted that $80K, then next year, I'd have an 84.8% chance of success, and if I pushed it out another two years, 92.9%.

In most instances, if I want the same $ amount, the No-SS scenario has me working another 2-3 years. Or, if I want to go out the same year, it drops my chance of success around 13-16%.

As for my tolerance threshold, 95% or greater means I'd be comfortable doing it. 80-95%, it would just depend, on my mood at the time, circumstances, the economy, etc. And, how close to 95%, or 80%, I am. However, I wouldn't retire with a less than 80% chance of success, unless really forced to.

However, everybody's circumstances will be different. In my case, SS isn't a huge percentage of my my annual draw, to begin with. For instance, if I was to retire this year...well, I'm 50 now. Won't get SS until 62, and the estimated benefit will only be about $16K per year. So right now, I have a 93.9% chance of making it for 12 years, relying solely on my investments for that $80K, and then at 62, SS is only accounting for about 20% of my annual budget.

For someone more dependent on SS, obviously a cut will hurt them more than me. However, I'm sure it will still be there, in some form, for the foreseeable future. And any alterations they make, won't hurt things as much as my worst-case scenario of it going away entirely!
Andre1969 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2020, 06:51 AM   #34
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
DrRoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Michigan
Posts: 4,939
I am 60 but RE'd at 57. I have not so far counted any SS, and whatever I may receive (probably at 70) will be frosting on the cake. Worst case should be that benefits are reduced to the level of the pay-in, but I expect that politicians will not let it go completely that far.
__________________
"The mountains are calling, and I must go." John Muir
DrRoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2020, 06:52 AM   #35
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 1,871
Quote:
Originally Posted by FREE866 View Post
Im 53. I have factored it in to my plans and hope to wait till I'm 70 ( 2036) to start collecting. Nothing is guaranteed, but my sense is at the very least we will get 80% + ( probably 100%) of what SS tells us. I think there is a tendency on this board for people to be over conservative about these topics.
+1 on each sentence above

I don't understand the SS fear mongering.
mrfeh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2020, 07:13 AM   #36
Administrator
Gumby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 22,923
I say you should keep working, just in case. If everyone retires, it won't be nearly as much fun.
__________________
Living an analog life in the Digital Age.
Gumby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2020, 08:13 AM   #37
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 1,188
I'm 47, FIRed 5 years ago. I use 75%, I dont see a situation where they would eliminate it. Health care is a bigger issue and more likely to impact my long term finances than anything else.
karen1972 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2020, 08:25 AM   #38
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
corn18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,890
I get the impression that those that do not plan on SS being there wear that as a badge of honor. I'd have to work another 5 years to retire without needing SS. That seems silly. Work 5 more years in case SS isn't there in 15 years? No thanks. I am planning on it, counting on it and retiring in 2 years expecting it to be there.

For those that don't need it, did you ever think about retiring a LOT earlier by including it?
__________________
Consistently sets low goals and fails to achieve them.
corn18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2020, 08:35 AM   #39
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Reno
Posts: 1,331
I figure on it being available, at a 10-25% discount (I'm 61; DW 57); it would be political suicide to cut SS. We allegedly had plenty of money for the taxcut and increases in military spending to add to the deficit; not sure why SS is different, although I suppose the money for SS goes to the hoi polloi rather than corporations.



Quote:
Originally Posted by corn18 View Post
I get the impression that those that do not plan on SS being there wear that as a badge of honor. I'd have to work another 5 years to retire without needing SS. That seems silly. Work 5 more years in case SS isn't there in 15 years? No thanks. I am planning on it, counting on it and retiring in 2 years expecting it to be there.

For those that don't need it, did you ever think about retiring a LOT earlier by including it?
RobLJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2020, 08:56 AM   #40
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Washington State
Posts: 2,341
I am 56 and do count on Social Security as part of our retirement plan. There is no way to know what "might" happen, so I make my plans based on the information available now. The SS trust fund is projected to run out in 2034 which would mean a reduction in benefits. So I only plan to receive 75% of the benefits SS estimates.
mountainsoft is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
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
Does it make sense to delay the younger, lower wage earning spouse Social Security? Camas Lilly FIRE and Money 27 01-30-2019 11:28 AM
Younger folks (less than 45), what are YOU doing? moneymaker FIRE and Money 26 01-24-2016 05:16 AM
Does Really Tough Exercise Make You Feel Younger? TromboneAl Health and Early Retirement 75 08-17-2015 05:42 PM
At least you can look younger RonBoyd Health and Early Retirement 43 10-21-2009 07:28 PM
Looking younger--would you if you could? hakuna matata Other topics 29 04-20-2009 02:48 PM

» Quick Links

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:15 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.