Why people take SS at 62

[haha]

This thread brings out a lot of strong feelings!

To me, even as a single man, the wait til 70 plan seemed better-even though I probably have plenty to fund my retirement without an SPIA. It just seemed like an excellent fixed income investment in the current very low interest rate environment.

Ha

[lynxville]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rescueme I'll assume you meant a check for you and your spouse (if I'm wrong, please give more info). IOW, you did not consider your spouse's future (without you, and your SS income) in your decision? Just wondering...

Yes my wife and I thought about it and discussed all the ups and downs of retiring early. First if I croak she receives my SS which is larger than hers. Next I am well insured, so there is some upside to my departure. We have no debt, two homes, new cars, plenty of cash, and investments. I wont start taking any money from Ira's until 70 when I have to.

In a nutchell I have seen many a person retire at an older age and never do anything after they retire but sit. It all depends on your health, which can go south at anytime. Next big thing for me is if I check out early I just got cheated. I am glad to be retired and never regret doing so. Sure I could of made some more money and larger retirement, but for me I had enough of corporate life and I was happy with what I have and see no nead for morre money. I guess how much is enough?

[pb4uski]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lynxville ....Sure I could of made some more money and larger retirement, but for me I had enough of corporate life and I was happy with what I have and see no nead for morre money. I guess how much is enough?

Exactly. Under most reasonable scenarios, if I had continued to w*rk I would have just been enriching my heirs, so I decided to ER and enjoy however many remaining days I have - and I'm lovin' it!

[rescueme]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pb4uski Exactly. Under most reasonable scenarios, if I had continued to w*rk I would have just been enriching my heirs....(snip)

Lucky for you that you have no responsibility for their future

Just from one who has...

[rescueme]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lynxville Yes my wife and I thought about it and discussed all the ups and downs of retiring early. First if I croak she receives my SS which is larger than hers. Next I am well insured, so there is some upside to my departure.

Sounds reasonable. Thanks for answering my question.

[MichaelB]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lynxville Yes my wife and I thought about it and discussed all the ups and downs of retiring early. First if I croak she receives my SS which is larger than hers. Next I am well insured, so there is some upside to my departure.

One of my life rules is always make sure you are worth more alive than dead. No need to tempt destiny - or anyone else

[rescueme]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelB One of my life rules is always make sure you are worth more alive than dead.

OTOH, if you have the "responsibilty" to protect those that remain after your passing, you may look at it in a different manner.

It's not a normal situation for most, but we have to face the responsibilites that were given to us (as parents of a disabled person).

Not my intent at all to bring down the conversation to our level, but just to comment that what most folks think as a "normal life" - may not be.

There are exceptions to all rules...

[Lsbcal]

There is certainly a healthy diversity of opinions on this subject.

Has this discussion changed anyone's mind? Or are we all just stating our position?

[rescueme]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lsbcal (snip)...Or are we all just stating our position?

Like any subject, there will always be a difference in opinion, based upon personal situations, along with wants/requirements.

I would like to think that all of us on this thread are showing the variations that can/could be considered, and hopefully can be used by others to form their own decision on the subject under discussion.

As in all things in life - there is no such thing as the "perfect answer" that must/be followed by others...

[Mulligan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lsbcal There is certainly a healthy diversity of opinions on this subject. Has this discussion changed anyone's mind? Or are we all just stating our position?

It has brought clarity to my situation. I have a long time GF, and the plan is to stay together and eventually live together, but no certificate to bind as it really offers no benefit tax, income, or procreation wise. However, based on the math and current asset level, the only way to get her into retirement at an age where I can enjoy her company and yet still provide her long term protection is clear. We will have to be at a point where we can live off my pension, and save her smaller resources, and delay her SS until 70. I will go a head and draw my meager WEP SS of about $100 bucks in current dollars at 62, as delaying for $150 seems trivial.

[rescueme]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mulligan (snip) but no certificate to bind as it really offers no benefit tax, income, or procreation wise.

While I respect your decision, being married may give you some advantage on the income side, be it survivor benefits on your pension and also on the SS side under survivorship benefits and possible spousal claims.

Hopefully you have considered those points in your "calculations"...

[MichaelB]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lsbcal There is certainly a healthy diversity of opinions on this subject. Has this discussion changed anyone's mind? Or are we all just stating our position?

My view 'til now had been focused on the benefit of delaying as long as possible and I hadn't considered taking SS earlier in response to a portfolio decline or other negative financial hit. The ability to begin SS at any point in an 8 year window gives us financial flexibility.

[Mulligan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rescueme While I respect your decision, being married may give you some advantage on the income side, be it survivor benefits on your pension and also on the SS side under survivorship benefits and possible spousal claims. Hopefully you have considered those points in your "calculations"...

Being single when I started drawing my pension, I had no choice but to take option 1 which is full payment of pension, but when I die, it dies too. My only other option was 2 with my daughter being the recipient, but since she was 17, my pension would have been whacked severely. I wont benefit from GF SS because the WEP and/or GPO would net me nothing due to my high pension. Drawing her SS early would not only reduce her monthly income at a later age if I die, but drag her income into my 24% tax bracket which she would not be in on her own.

[W2R]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lsbcal There is certainly a healthy diversity of opinions on this subject. Has this discussion changed anyone's mind? Or are we all just stating our position?

Well, my position isn't very firm so it has been wobbling as always. I do think that if I (personally) want to get the maximum $$$$ I would wait until I am 70, and also I still think that would be great old age insurance. If I never thought about it, I'd probably just wait until 70.

But whenever I read these threads, I think how neat it would be to get a regular, reliable check every month. I think about my family's longevity and how that gives me absolutely no guarantees. All in all, greed can be a pretty strong motive, too.

[rescueme]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mulligan Being single when I started drawing my pension, I had no choice but to take option 1 which is full payment of pension...

Understood.

You play the hand that was dealt ...

[Mulligan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rescueme Understood. You play the hand that was dealt ...

Of course if I had taken option 2 and died today, I would have always wondered if my daughters tear would have been of sorrow, or of joy having a monthly COLA'D pension for the rest of her life at age 19!

[jime444]

My second post to the string, sorry. The wife and I are taking it at 62 for all the reasons we stated earlier. Health issues, genes, (lack of) trust in our political leaders, etc. I understand why many of you are thinking about delaying this until 70, yes, I understand the 8+% return/year? Sure, you betcha, longevity insurance, federal government style.

However, another thought comes to mind. Call me a contrarian, a cynic, a sarcastic old bastard, I'd probably agree. In every instance during my life, pension "reform", benefit "improvements", etc. someone (a business, government, or whatever) has tried to steer me towards their "new" plan. "buy now, demand will be incredible". And my analysis at that time using various calculators would show the numbers looked better. That is, using the basic assumption that things will continue to go on "as usual". What else would you do, eh? Now, being the cynic that I am, in many cases we did not do it. Guess what, I've been right about 80% of the time. The latest was with a megaCorp pension. We got the full court press to change to a "enhanced" 401k matching a few years ago and give up the pension. A independant financial engine showed a remarkable 8% better return with the enhanced match. Hmm......notice any similarities? Now, 6 years later (after we've been acquired/takenover, hostile but not disclosed by the way); the enhanced match is cut to 40% for everyone and the guys who stayed with the pension accruing years of service, made out just fine. In fact, much better.

My point is, "burning up" your hard earned savings first, money that YOU have control of, and counting on the feds to provide you with longevity insurance is, in my opinion, pretty trusting. Btw, my dark side changed the word trusting to insane in the sentence above. Yes, a 8% return, sounds a little too good to be true to me. I think like megaCorp, the feds are just one little "made-up" rule change away to making this a very poor economic decision. If I make it to 80 years old, we'll see. However, at least we get a choice and I know what ours will be. Personally, we're going in the opposite direction. Good luck to you and yours.

[rescueme]

Quote:

Originally Posted by W2R (snip) ...it has been wobbling as always.

Weebles wobble, but they don't fall down ...

I think you are safe...

[wingfooted]

Slightly unusual situation

DW is four years older.

DW accumulated SS benefit is roughly 50% of DH.

Simulations indicate the maximum benefit from the following strategy:

DW takes SS at age 62
DH takes 50% spousal benefits based on DW's plan at FRA (66 years and 2 months) for the period until age 70
DH waits until age 70 to take his plan's maximum benefits and then DW switches over to the 50% spousal benefit based on DH's plan

Anyone see any problems or pitfalls ?

[Rustward]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jime444 ... Now, 6 years later (after we've been acquired/takenover, hostile but not disclosed by the way); the enhanced match is cut to 40% for everyone and the guys who stayed with the pension accruing years of service, made out just fine. In fact, much better.

Would it have turned out any better if they just fired you and some of your colleagues instead of cutting benefits?