Suze Orman SS payments advice

[SnowballCamper]

Quote:

Originally Posted by CRLLS In addition, life expectancy has increased since those numbers were determined. The chances of living past the breakeven point are greater than they were when the numbers were last adjusted. Just thought I'd add another point in favor of delaying.

I think this is why the break even point matters for one who doesn’t need the $ at early retirement age, but wants to make an informed decision based on their personal life expectancy.

[Perryinva]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SnowballCamper I think this is why the break even point matters for one who doesn’t need the $ at early retirement age, but wants to make an informed decision based on their personal life expectancy.

I have to partially take back whatI said. I remember now that someone pointed out to me that there are plenty of people that regard the bottom line balance as more important than income, as they have so much income that the only real objective is to maximize the estate for future generations. Something like that would never be on my mind.

Also, as far as actuarially speaking, it is important to consider that the healthy, fit, non smoking, minor drinking, no hereditary issues, heart disease, cancer, etc person is lumped together with the exact opposite, of which there are way more unhealthy seniors in the US that healthy ones, ie another reason the numbers living past 85 is less in the US as a percentage compared to may other countries. I like those odds for me, personally.

If I really felt my health & family history made little the chances of living to 82, I would file early too.

[Markola]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Time2 Clobber left because someone disagreed with him, hmm.

Ha. One can just choose to read other strings but some are all “I’m taking my talents to Miami!” Funny.

[pb4uski]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SnowballCamper I'm curious what article RunningBum or pb4uski would suggest for someone to read about the SS decision (when to claim benefits?).

I think that opensocialsecurity.com is the best tool available that I know of.

What it does is to calculate the expected present value for all possible claiming periods. The expected present value considers the benefit for each claiming strategy, the probability that you will be alive to receive the benefit based on one of six different mortality tables that you can select from and discounts that expected benefit for the time value of money using a real discount rate that the tool provides but that the user can override. The tool then tells you the claiming strategy with the highest expected present value and you can calculate the expected present value of alternative claiming strategies that you provide.

I ran it for a number of scenarios for DW and I (both as early as possible, both at 65, both at FRA and her at FRA and me at 70) both with a haircut in 2034 and without, and the EPVs were not all that different so in our case it isn't a critical decision.

	No haircut	Haircut
Optimal solution	100.0%	100.0%
Both now	97.8%	98.9%
Both 65	99.0%	99.7%
Both at FRA	99.2%	99.2%
Me 70/DW FRA	98.7%	96.3%

The creator also has written a book, Social Security Made Simple, which I have read a few years ago, whihc is very good.

[RobbieB]

Mother non smoker and non drinker, lived to 87

Father smoked and drank every day, lived to 92

I'm thinkin' me at 90.

[ncbill]

Assuming they don't increase FRA, we'll be taking it at full retirement age (67) for both of us...one on their own record plus 50% spouse.

Using various calculators for our specific situation shows there's no point in waiting until age 70, as that adds a trivial amount over our expected lifetimes.

[Rianne]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pb4uski I think the best way to assess your returns is to compare them to a similiar portfolio using Portfolio Visualizer. But the comparisons are only relevant if you have everything at Vanguard and everything is being included in the numbers that you posted above. Such a comparison wouldn't work for me because I have fair and increasing amounts outside of Vanguard. 50/50 Vanguard Total Stock/Total Bond Inv 10 years... Apr 2010 - Mar 2020.... +7.18% 5 years..... Apr 2015 - Mar 2020.... +4.79% 3 years..... Apr 2017 - Mar 2020.... +4.82% 1 year....... Apr 2019 - Mar 2020.... +0.36% https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/...location2_1=50

Probably because of International funds and a few other under performing choices. I'll plug in all our funds, thanks.

[pb4uski]

Yes, international would drag it down. What you might do is to plug in yout target AA in Portfolio Visualizer and use the returns from your target AA as a benchmark for comparison with your actual returns.

[ShokWaveRider]

One reason NOT to is if it pushes MAGI to high for ACA Subsidies.

[ivinsfan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShokWaveRider One reason NOT to is if it pushes MAGI to high for ACA Subsidies.

That issue isn't sexy enough for Suze....

[Time2]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ncbill Assuming they don't increase FRA, we'll be taking it at full retirement age (67) for both of us...one on their own record plus 50% spouse. Using various calculators for our specific situation shows there's no point in waiting until age 70, as that adds a trivial amount over our expected lifetimes.

Will that tax 85% of your SS at 22 or 24% brackets.
Can you do Roth conversions to lower your RMDs before you're
72. If you can you wouldn't want to add SS to your income.
This question is very difficult because of so many variables.
Not to mention you don't know when you are going to die.

[CRLLS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SnowballCamper I think this is why the break even point matters for one who doesn’t need the $ at early retirement age, but wants to make an informed decision based on their personal life expectancy.

Agreed. Let's face it. For those who need the money early, they take the early SS payments and don't even think about breakeven age or personal life expectancy. I believe that it is only those who can make ends meet are considering the breakeven age.

[Perryinva]

Yes, while true, virtually none (that post on forums like this) ever say that. They always claim the break even argument. DW filed at 62. Her only reason was “because I want it now”. It’s her mad money. I had no say in it. I can see the “I’m tired of waiting for it” reason, especially when you start not collecting $40k a year...

[bobbyr]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Time2 Also, I'm waiting until 70, because my bride is about 5 years younger, and I want that that larger benefit for her if I die before her.

That is similar to our situation. My wife is 57 in July, me 62 in August. I anticipate taking it at 66 to 70 depending on how things are looking. The larger monthly benefit for her is my target, her family has longevity.

[PatrickA5]

I'll finally be 62 in two months (assuming I can avoid the virus). I'll decide then if I'm going to take it or not. Most calculators have me taking early (62-64) and DW taking at 70 (she's the higher earner). The NPV of just about any scenario is within 1%-2% of each other, so it really doesn't make any difference when I take it - assuming she waits until 70.

We'll just have wait and see how this all plays out. I imagine a lot of people will end up taking their SS this year as the layoffs mount.

[ivinsfan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PatrickA5 I'll finally be 62 in two months (assuming I can avoid the virus). I'll decide then if I'm going to take it or not. Most calculators have me taking early (62-64) and DW taking at 70 (she's the higher earner). The NPV of just about any scenario is within 1%-2% of each other, so it really doesn't make any difference when I take it - assuming she waits until 70. We'll just have wait and see how this all plays out. I imagine a lot of people will end up taking their SS this year as the layoffs mount.

Depends on the age at layoff doesn't it...and if you are over 62 you have the enhanced unemployment to help bridge that gap. I see the market's problems and the feeling of " something bad could happen to me anytime" as bigger factors in people claiming SS sooner rather then later.

[PatrickA5]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ivinsfan Depends on the age at layoff doesn't it...and if you are over 62 you have the enhanced unemployment to help bridge that gap. I see the market's problems and the feeling of " something bad could happen to me anytime" as bigger factors in people claiming SS sooner rather then later.

Agreed.

In our case, DW will likely lose her oil-related job. She can take unemployment but even with the extra $600 per week wouldn't be close to what she's making now. So, we'd have a decision to make on whether I would want to start SS early to help with the lost income. I don't thing we'd want to have 100% of our income coming out of our retirement accounts this early in retirement - although I think we could probably manage just fine.

I personally know a lot of early 60's people that could be out of a job soon, with little hope of finding something else. Don't know how many would need/want to take SS early.

[pb4uski]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PatrickA5 ... I personally know a lot of early 60's people that could be out of a job soon, with little hope of finding something else. Don't know how many would need/want to take SS early.

If this little tidbit is true then probably a boatload. Sad.

Quote:

According to the Government Accountability Office (GAO), about half of households age 55 and older have no retirement savings (such as in a 401(k) plan or an IRA).

[ivinsfan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PatrickA5 Agreed. In our case, DW will likely lose her oil-related job. She can take unemployment but even with the extra $600 per week wouldn't be close to what she's making now. So, we'd have a decision to make on whether I would want to start SS early to help with the lost income. I don't thing we'd want to have 100% of our income coming out of our retirement accounts this early in retirement - although I think we could probably manage just fine. I personally know a lot of early 60's people that could be out of a job soon, with little hope of finding something else. Don't know how many would need/want to take SS early.

Sorry about your DW situation but if you need HI from the market although the unemployment wouldn't cover her wage loss, it might be just the ticket for ACA subsidy factors. Adding SS income to UI income might not be a good thing. A sharp pencil will be needed. With her wage you might be over the cliff for this year but perhaps pull retirement money to live on next year before 2021

[PatrickA5]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pb4uski If this little tidbit is true then probably a boatload. Sad.

DW and I have been in the oil industry for 30+ years each. Most of our friends are in oil related jobs. In our neck of the woods (Oklahoma), the oil bust is even worse than the Corona virus - at least for higher paying workers. Fortunately, for us I'm retired and she is mainly working because she likes it.

DS, on the other hand, is pretty much screwed. He's graduating this year with his Accounting degree (like mom and dad) and nobody is hiring.