Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
One other stat I would like to toss out here is that and I didnt count yet but most had some sort of civil service job (stated, federal, teachers). I suspect that health care professionals (nurses and doctors) go beyond that age. I know a few nurses that went beyond 65. A great majority of the doctors go beyond that age as well.
That is true. hehe what gets me is the ostensibly all here who retired before 65 apparently had no qualms about getting off the 'work' bandwagon. Me, well sometimes I think I'm 'programmed' for it after all the years .Probably time for a new mindset, eh? Coming from one who's almost retired but not quite off the fence!...;-)....
Retired at 52 with a direct benefit pension, and full medical after working with the County 22 1/2 years. Medical premium is a bit more a month than what I paid while I was working, but it is still a good plan. Three more years and I can apply for SS.
That is true. hehe what gets me is the ostensibly all here who retired before 65 apparently had no qualms about getting off the 'work' bandwagon. Me, well sometimes I think I'm 'programmed' for it after all the years .Probably time for a new mindset, eh? Coming from one who's almost retired but not quite off the fence!...;-)....
Yup. I am in that mode right now. I still love the work so I will miss it. The pay is good and so will the retirement pay. I paid a price for that but I beleive it is a price I would gladly pay. The moe of planning and prepping for retirement in my mind is as important as the lead-up to this point. Right now Mrs Golf and I are talking over possible locations to move to. With 6 years to go we can really pick and choose the perfect place for us. It could mean that we even stay closer to home. We will though move to a smaller home. I will hold the wife to that this time.
I mention that and laugh at it as well since 1984 we have lived in increasingly bigger homes inspite of the fact that the wife says she hates cleaning the bigger house. Go figure we just built our current home 8 years ago and it is bigger then our last house. Okay they are not mansions but this house is 2500sf on two floors and a basement.
Age 60, wife 62. Planning retirement but both still working full time. We are planning to reduce to part time rather than retire, even though we have SS and savings coming up. I'd rather be useful and earning my own way as much as possible than be able bodied and sucking off others hard work.
Huh?! how is retirement sucking off someone else's hard work? If you like your job and choose to keep working, but if you have paid into SS for 35+ years and have saved religiously, I don't see how that is suck off someone else's work. Help me out. Under what scenario does a retiree live off someone else, and how does continuing to work prevent that?
Huh?! how is retirement sucking off someone else's hard work? If you like your job and choose to keep working, but if you have paid into SS for 35+ years and have saved religiously, I don't see how that is suck off someone else's work. Help me out. Under what scenario does a retiree live off someone else, and how does continuing to work prevent that?
I'd like to know that too. But in the meantime I glues we'll just have to hang our heads in despair and say daily mea culpas for having the temerity to be "useless" while living off two government pensions and two SS accounts we worked long and hard for. Oh, the shame of it!
You may not quite understand how SS works. Those that pay into the system are paying PRESENT beneficiaries. The SS trust fund is a mere accounting tool. This is how the system has really always worked. So when you are retired, the people who are presently working are working to pay your benefits. So this means that as a retired person, when they go to Walmart, the poor cashier checking them out is paying 7% off the top of their income to fund their SS check. I don't think this is quite a fair system, especially if there are retired people who could easily afford to get by without their SS check at all. Think of this, some guy might be driving a $100,000 motor home or taking a trip to Europe on their SS check while other people are working two low paying jobs just to make ends meet, all the while paying 7% of his or her income off the top to fund SS. IMHO, SS should probably be means tested. It is to a certain degree, through taxation, but not completely.
You may not quite understand how SS works. Those that pay into the system are paying PRESENT beneficiaries. The SS trust fund is a mere accounting tool. This is how the system has really always worked. So when you are retired, the people who are presently working are working to pay your benefits. So this means that as a retired person, when they go to Walmart, the poor cashier checking them out is paying 7% off the top of their income to fund their SS check. I don't think this is quite a fair system, especially if there are retired people who could easily afford to get by without their SS check at all. Think of this, some guy might be driving a $100,000 motor home or taking a trip to Europe on their SS check while other people are working two low paying jobs just to make ends meet, all the while paying 7% of his or her income off the top to fund SS. IMHO, SS should probably be means tested. It is to a certain degree, through taxation, but not completely.
So for us poor schmucks that work hard, paid our FICA and Medicare taxes and save up enough to have a nice retirement without it should just sign it over to the system to do as they please ? What kind of nonsense is that?
Well you know I think i'm just a little farther along than you on a few things but really not fully realizing 'retired' life 100% yet.
And I don't know about that 'sucking sound audie noted but really I'm ok with getting my SS check! You know the missus was proud of me. She said heheh, you did work like a dog! Take it!...;-)...
You may not quite understand how SS works. Those that pay into the system are paying PRESENT beneficiaries. The SS trust fund is a mere accounting tool. This is how the system has really always worked. So when you are retired, the people who are presently working are working to pay your benefits. So this means that as a retired person, when they go to Walmart, the poor cashier checking them out is paying 7% off the top of their income to fund their SS check. I don't think this is quite a fair system, especially if there are retired people who could easily afford to get by without their SS check at all. Think of this, some guy might be driving a $100,000 motor home or taking a trip to Europe on their SS check while other people are working two low paying jobs just to make ends meet, all the while paying 7% of his or her income off the top to fund SS. IMHO, SS should probably be means tested. It is to a certain degree, through taxation, but not completely.
Oh geez, when you're working you pay into social security..period. Nothing else to consider here! If you retire with other income so be it, more power to ya! So the guy with the motor home etc shouldn't get what he paid into all his life? This is ludricous! Somebody's getting something you want...whoopee! Get over it!
You may not quite understand how SS works. Those that pay into the system are paying PRESENT beneficiaries. The SS trust fund is a mere accounting tool. This is how the system has really always worked. So when you are retired, the people who are presently working are working to pay your benefits. So this means that as a retired person, when they go to Walmart, the poor cashier checking them out is paying 7% off the top of their income to fund their SS check. I don't think this is quite a fair system, especially if there are retired people who could easily afford to get by without their SS check at all. Think of this, some guy might be driving a $100,000 motor home or taking a trip to Europe on their SS check while other people are working two low paying jobs just to make ends meet, all the while paying 7% of his or her income off the top to fund SS. IMHO, SS should probably be means tested. It is to a certain degree, through taxation, but not completely.
Three points: 1) Most of us aren't stupid; 2) I'd bet that all of us understand how SS works; and, 3) Fair or not in your view, I doubt that many of us are going to beat ourselves, wear sackcloth and dump ashes on our heads for being served by a law-wage worker young enough to have years of learning, earning and planning time ahead of them. You, of course, are free to reject Social Security or volunteer it all back to the government or donate it to causes that serve the less fortunate. As for me, I paid into it for 45 years and have no qualms about accepting it.
For the record, all five of my children are doing well and earn way above minimum wage. They have yet to snivel about supporting my SS earnings. Gosh! I wonder why that is.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
how is retirement sucking off someone else's hard work? If you like your job and choose to keep working, but if you have paid into SS for 35+ years and have saved religiously, I don't see how that is suck off someone else's work. Help me out. Under what scenario does a retiree live off someone else, and how does continuing to work prevent that?
What kind of nonsense is that?
