When to Claim SS?

[Tekward]

Forgive me. I joke.

I've done the same analysis as many and concluded that the answer is based on three things:

• your unique situation,
• the unknowns and
• your assumptions.

The "right" answer is what feels right to you. By all means, keep calculating to get what feels right.

 

[pacergal]

Yep, your answer depends on your own unique life situations.
Something to definitely think about, backwards, forwards, and everything in between.
Your choice is right for you.

 

[Midpack]

Here's a VERY basic decision tree (that some will pick apart), but the decision depends entirely on the answers to these questions, and more...[gender, marital history, minor or disabled children, are you disabled, your health/projected longevity, health of spouse, spouse's earnings relative to yours, other assets, your tax scenario, employment status, etc.]

 

[TheWizard]

Nice joke, yes...

 

[Lewis Clark]

Here's a VERY basic decision tree (that some will pick apart), but the decision depends entirely on the answers to these questions, and more...[gender, marital history, minor or disabled children, are you disabled, your health/projected longevity, health of spouse, spouse's earnings relative to yours, other assets, your tax scenario, employment status, etc.]

Good thing it is a simple decision. : )

 

[Gumby]

I just listened to the voices in my head. That has always worked for investing. Although I do wish they would stop bickering so much.

 

[pb4uski]

I like the decision tree that Midpack posted and think that I have seen it before. It validates my current plan to wait to 70. though I'll concede that 70 is about 6 months longer that the theoretical optimum for me according to opensocialcurity.com

 

[shotgunner]

The BIG problem with making the optimum choice is not being able to predict your age at death or a significant health problem that may leave you alive but not fully functioning; Stroke, H/A, Dementia, Parkinsons, Cancer. I wish all those who opt to start SS as late as possible good health and good luck going forward. I have seen too many friends and relatives suffer and pass from these conditions, including two who thought they would live much longer because their parents did.

 

[Lorenzo]

I like the decision tree that Midpack posted and think that I have seen it before. It validates my current plan to wait to 70. though I'll concede that 70 is about 6 months longer that the theoretical optimum for me according to opensocialcurity.com

That decision tree just scratches the surface, as the comments attached to some of the decision boxes allude to. We can rely on actuarial estimates of our life expectancy, but ideally we would have that broken down into how much time we will spend in each of the so-called go-go, go-slow and no-go phases. Impossible, of course. From that other recent thread, I have recognized we don't know whether the costs of the no-go phase, with the possibility of assisted living/skilled nursing, will be greater than, less than, or about the same as the go-go phase. Some have suggested that for lack of any ability to predict more precisely, we should aim our SS strategy for "highest lifetime benefit" and budget for a fixed level of spending throughout retirement.

 

[pb4uski]

^^^ I dunno. If you have enough to, along with SS cover the go-go, go-slow and no-go costs... in other words you are not still working and can answer the second two questions yes, then it is really more a matter of personal preference and your longevity expectations to aim for the highest lifetime benefit.

I don't see the last part... budget for a fixed level of spending throughout retirement... as being realistic or even desireable.

 

[audreyh1]

Didn’t we just spend days debating this very topic? I guess it never ends.

 

[GenXguy]

Decision tree for me is don't take it until the year following my 65th birthday, at the earliest, because I need to keep my income lower for better ACA subsidies.

 

[pb4uski]

Didn’t we just spend days debating this very topic? I guess it never ends.

Seems like months and years rather than days.

 

[Koolau]

Didn’t we just spend days debating this very topic? I guess it never ends.

Heh, heh, I guess we could switch to the mortgage in retirement or pay off the mortgage before retirement argument.

 

[Texas Proud]

Very simple decision tree... it has nothing in it for spouse in the mix...

Mine is very simple... spouse is younger so probably will live longer... spouse has no SS so needs to get mine... the calculators say that she will get more money from my SS than I will if we both live to our expected death day...

Simple...

 

[Murf2]

Didn’t we just spend days debating this very topic? I guess it never ends.

Yes but this time I think we will get The Definitive Answer.

 

[audreyh1]

Yes but this time I think we will get The Definitive Answer.

Yeah, good luck!

 

[Lorenzo]

^^^ I dunno. If you have enough to, along with SS cover the go-go, go-slow and no-go costs... in other words you are not still working and can answer the second two questions yes, then it is really more a matter of personal preference and your longevity expectations to aim for the highest lifetime benefit.

I don't see the last part... budget for a fixed level of spending throughout retirement... as being realistic or even desireable.

I may have overstated it when I said "fixed level of spending throughout retirement" when I meant fixed from age 62 to at least sometime past 70. It was you who explained how to do this here:

https://www.early-retirement.org/threads/another-reason-to-claim-social-security-at-62.122602/post-3109511

And then a few posts after that someone else pointed to a Bogleheads thread that described the same basic idea in an even more simplified form:

https://www.early-retirement.org/threads/another-reason-to-claim-social-security-at-62.122602/post-3109582

So at age 62 you set aside from your savings eight years of what would be your SS benefit had you delayed until 70, and then for the next eight years your total spending can be roughly 1/8 of that per year plus a SWR amount from the remaining savings. Then going forward from age 70 when the set-aside bucket (savings account, bond ladder, etc.) is depleted, your spending can be what you receive from SS plus the SWR amount from the remaining savings, which will be roughly the same as your spending had been between ages 62 and 70. Do I have this right? The highest lifetime benefit is the result of delaying SS until age 70, according to the calculators such as opensocialsecurity that take life expectancy into account.

As for longevity expectations, so long as I have no particular health issues that would indicate a shorter than actuarially predicted lifespan, I suppose the rational thing to do would be to answer the last question on the flowchart yes, I expect to live past 81. Very few of my family members have achieved this, but my physician with whom I get annual checkups, including the calcium score and so forth, keeps telling me nothing in my test results indicates a higher probability of early death. I can think of my dad who died from a heart attack while still working at 63 or my mom who made it to all of 77 before cancer got her, but I have to believe I will live longer than they did.

Now, if I had a crystal ball and could not only be more sure of my own life expectancy but also break it down into how many years I would spend in the go-go phase versus the no-go phase, I could adjust that spending so it is not fixed but rather tilit it toward where I would need it or enjoy it most, whether that is in the go-go or no-go phase. But of course there is no such crystal ball.

Sorry for the long-winded reply, but I wanted to clarify what I was referring to.

 

[Lorenzo]

Didn’t we just spend days debating this very topic? I guess it never ends.

Yes, and I appreciate the patience of all of you long-time ER.org members for whom this is a tired old topic with us newcomers for whom this is all new.

 

[Midpack]

I like the decision tree that Midpack posted and think that I have seen it before. It validates my current plan to wait to 70. though I'll concede that 70 is about 6 months longer that the theoretical optimum for me according to opensocialcurity.com

I was curious about that too. I think opensocialsecurity.com is a very good resource, but (after I fixed all the additional input options) it recommended 70 for me, and just under 69 for DW. I just claimed in May, but we're planning on DW waiting to age 70 - though the difference in the end is very small...

I posted the decision tree a while ago. Some liked it, while others mercilessly picked it apart as too simplistic ...surprise surprise. Hence the disclaimer this time. And yet the same criticism - without offering something better.

 

[TheWizard]

Didn’t we just spend days debating this very topic? I guess it never ends.

The OP started this thread as a joke.
Others are running with it...

 

[Midpack]

Didn’t we just spend days debating this very topic? I guess it never ends.

Like a couple dozen topics here...there are always new players.

 

[Lorenzo]

Like a couple dozen topics here...there are always new players.

I'm just trying to follow the conversation as it moves from thread to thread. It seems there are something like three recent threads covering more or less the same topic.

 

[audreyh1]

The OP started this thread as a joke.
Others are running with it...

I figured. But people are just going to debate all over again. Ad nauseum.

 

[Tekward]

But there was a cat doing shooters!!
(or travel bottles or min-bottles, or in the northeast and Scotland – nips).