Well put, the break even point is an important factor… Another critical factor in whether to take Ss now or to wait, is the survivor benefit. For my wife and I, we probably have good enough cash flow between 67 and 70, but waiting till 70 gives us almost $1000 more per month for which ever of us has to continue on in life. Sad to even talk this way, but it’s reality!
My full retirement age is 67. I’m considering Taking SSI when I turn 64. I’m also a disabled vet andI currently collecting disability from the VA. What do you see as the pros and cons?
All the SS calculators ASSUME that the program will be there for your entire life. That is a BIG assumption given that the program will go insolvent in less than a decade. Sure congress will add a few pennies to it at election time, but there is NO plan or intent to fully fund SS. The only fixes congress proposes are more benefits cuts and increases to the eligibility age. How can you promise more benefits in the future (by waiting to 70) if the program is constantly cut? Promises of more money in the future never materialize in business, government, or anywhere else. I am "A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush" guy. I'm taking SS now at 62 before SS is SS in name only.
Draw as soon as possible? So that would be age 62. The average 62-year-old male lives to be age 81. The average 62-year-old female lives to be age 84. (Source: Any of those Actuarial Life Tables, one of which is on the SS website.) This is longer than the above-mentioned break-even age. For women, it's a full five years longer! if you wait until age 67 to collect, the monthly benefit amount you will receive is 42.86% more than the amount you would have received at age 62. (This is true for everyone, regardless of their actual benefit amount.) Okay, so that percentage is not large enough for you. That's fine. I get it. No problem. But how high would that percentage have to be before you _would_ delay and take benefits later? 50%? 60%? More? Or, of course, flip the question around. The percentage deducted for taking benefits early is a full 30%. You're apparently fine with that. "Tomorrow is not promised to you." Again, no problem. But what if the amount deducted were 40%? Or 50% deducted? Is your attitude and decision the same? Start taking it as soon as possible? You HAVE to consider the percentage increase you receive by waiting, AND you HAVE to consider the time frame involved. Those two factors must be factored into your decision. I'm curious where you draw the line. Obviously, of the amount deducted was 90% and yet you only had to wait six months before you could receive all 100%, you'd most likely wait. So you can't just say draw it as soon as possible. At some point that would not be wise. To many, it's not wise as it is. The percentages say they will live far past the break-even point, and upon doing so, will begin to leave money on the table. Cheers.
Are you on track to retire? Click Here to Take the 3-Minute Assessment
threeoakswealth.typeform.com/wealthgauge
Well put, the break even point is an important factor… Another critical factor in whether to take Ss now or to wait, is the survivor benefit. For my wife and I, we probably have good enough cash flow between 67 and 70, but waiting till 70 gives us almost $1000 more per month for which ever of us has to continue on in life. Sad to even talk this way, but it’s reality!
Take it at 66. There is no guarantee that you will see 70.
Thanks, Three Oaks Wealth; your content is top-notch and the ultimate value-add.
Thank you, David!
My full retirement age is 67. I’m considering Taking SSI when I turn 64. I’m also a disabled vet andI currently collecting disability from the VA. What do you see as the pros and cons?
All the SS calculators ASSUME that the program will be there for your entire life. That is a BIG assumption given that the program will go insolvent in less than a decade. Sure congress will add a few pennies to it at election time, but there is NO plan or intent to fully fund SS. The only fixes congress proposes are more benefits cuts and increases to the eligibility age. How can you promise more benefits in the future (by waiting to 70) if the program is constantly cut? Promises of more money in the future never materialize in business, government, or anywhere else. I am "A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush" guy. I'm taking SS now at 62 before SS is SS in name only.
Mmmm maybe you should draw as soon as possible- because your not promised tomorrow- plus that money 💰 can work for you now instead of later
Draw as soon as possible? So that would be age 62.
The average 62-year-old male lives to be age 81. The average 62-year-old female lives to be age 84. (Source: Any of those Actuarial Life Tables, one of which is on the SS website.)
This is longer than the above-mentioned break-even age. For women, it's a full five years longer!
if you wait until age 67 to collect, the monthly benefit amount you will receive is 42.86% more than the amount you would have received at age 62. (This is true for everyone, regardless of their actual benefit amount.)
Okay, so that percentage is not large enough for you. That's fine. I get it. No problem. But how high would that percentage have to be before you _would_ delay and take benefits later? 50%? 60%? More?
Or, of course, flip the question around. The percentage deducted for taking benefits early is a full 30%. You're apparently fine with that. "Tomorrow is not promised to you." Again, no problem. But what if the amount deducted were 40%? Or 50% deducted? Is your attitude and decision the same? Start taking it as soon as possible?
You HAVE to consider the percentage increase you receive by waiting, AND you HAVE to consider the time frame involved. Those two factors must be factored into your decision.
I'm curious where you draw the line. Obviously, of the amount deducted was 90% and yet you only had to wait six months before you could receive all 100%, you'd most likely wait. So you can't just say draw it as soon as possible. At some point that would not be wise.
To many, it's not wise as it is. The percentages say they will live far past the break-even point, and upon doing so, will begin to leave money on the table.
Cheers.