U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 07-12-2014, 04:36 PM
 
71,526 posts, read 71,712,424 times
Reputation: 49105

Advertisements

all very important points.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-12-2014, 04:50 PM
Q44
 
Location: Hudson Valley, NY
895 posts, read 765,725 times
Reputation: 1761
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChuteTheMall View Post
I'd lump sum any pension as well, put it with the 401k into an IRA and plan to draw against it. Some say withdrawing 4% per year preserves the principle; I'm only doing 3% per year, paid monthly, for my first year while I get used to my new lifestyle. Closer to the end I might need 10% per year for medical expenses, or just for lulz.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Escort Rider View Post
In a part of your post which I didn't quote, you advocated "lump-summing" any pension. I never considered taking even a partial lump sum from mine because the pension is the ONE thing which guarantees I will never run out of money and will be able to live reasonably no matter how long I happen to live. So far I've been drawing it for nine years (age 61 to age 70).
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
i have to agee with you escort. last thing i would want to do is take a low to no risk pension with lifetime income and subject to the whims of the markets and rates at this stage of life.
We're looking at the traditional three legged stool of SS, pension and investments for retirement. We have the lump sum option but I intend to take it monthly. Knowing that the combination of SS and a pension with a 100% survivor benefit easily covers all of our monthly expenses is too much to pass up. And we still have the 401 to cover inflation and to get stupid with.

And to answer the OP. My wife will collect at 62, I'm 2 years older and will collect at 64. Break even ages, life expectancy, occasional luxuries, leaving some behind, when planning for a 30 year retirement it doesn't make enough of a difference to delay collecting.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2014, 04:53 PM
 
29,775 posts, read 34,863,854 times
Reputation: 11705
Quote:
Originally Posted by Q44 View Post
We're looking at the traditional three legged stool of SS, pension and investments for retirement. We have the lump sum option but I intend to take it monthly. Knowing that the combination of SS and a pension with a 100% survivor benefit easily covers all of our monthly expenses is too much to pass up. And we still have the 401 to cover inflation and to get stupid with.

And to answer the OP. My wife will collect at 62, I'm 2 years older and will collect at 64. Break even ages, life expectancy, occasional luxuries, leaving some behind, when planning for a 30 year retirement it doesn't make enough of a difference to delay collecting.
Many are similar to you and while we are doing 62/70 SS I understand your thinking fully. You are blessed with a retirement income floor that is more than comfortable enough for you and you have your 401 on top of and not as part of.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2014, 05:29 PM
 
Location: Las Vegas
13,888 posts, read 25,319,935 times
Reputation: 26382
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
if the spouse filed early the survivor benefit they are filing against is cut from what their spouses fra would have been even if they take it at their fra.

it just isn't slashed a 2nd time if the surviving spouse files at fra.
I do have a new SO but we are quite intentionally not married. We learned as much as we could and it looked like it would cost us so much it would be foolish to marry. I would prefer to be married but between what it would cost the two of us in SS there's no logical way to make it work.

I plan to claim my widow's benefits at 60... I believe this is the earliest possible. H never claimed any SS benefits at all so I should get half of what he would have gotten.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2014, 05:54 PM
 
71,526 posts, read 71,712,424 times
Reputation: 49105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Q44 View Post
We're looking at the traditional three legged stool of SS, pension and investments for retirement. We have the lump sum option but I intend to take it monthly. Knowing that the combination of SS and a pension with a 100% survivor benefit easily covers all of our monthly expenses is too much to pass up. And we still have the 401 to cover inflation and to get stupid with.

And to answer the OP. My wife will collect at 62, I'm 2 years older and will collect at 64. Break even ages, life expectancy, occasional luxuries, leaving some behind, when planning for a 30 year retirement it doesn't make enough of a difference to delay collecting.
it all boils down to major 2 issues if you are married. one- will your spouse be okay with the loss of one ss check and two , if you as the bread winner filed early can she survive okay on a reduced survivor benefit at the same time as the loss of that check.

the rest of the questions are easier . if you are not going to be dependent on the whims of markets and rates then take it early , no reason not to.

but if you are a nervous nelly type and need income from your portfolio will waiting for that much higher ss check let you cut portfolio withdrawals down to minimum forever once that check starts coming , and if anything happens to you does your wife have the stomach for money riding in the market?

that is something few men think about. widowed wives are a lot more gun shy of their own market investing to maintain income.


all the rest of the decisions are tax reasons .
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2014, 06:01 PM
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
3,745 posts, read 4,216,823 times
Reputation: 6866
Quote:
Originally Posted by yellowsnow View Post
I do have a new SO but we are quite intentionally not married. We learned as much as we could and it looked like it would cost us so much it would be foolish to marry. I would prefer to be married but between what it would cost the two of us in SS there's no logical way to make it work.

I plan to claim my widow's benefits at 60... I believe this is the earliest possible. H never claimed any SS benefits at all so I should get half of what he would have gotten.
At age 60 you will be eligible to receive 71.5% of what H would have gotten... not 50%.
And of course, if you change your mind about marriage, as long as you wait until you are 60 years old to remarry - you can STILL claim your late husband's survivor benefit. Just sayin'.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2014, 06:05 PM
 
29,775 posts, read 34,863,854 times
Reputation: 11705
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
it all boils down to major 2 issues if you are married. one- will your spouse be okay with the loss of one ss check and two , if you as the bread winner filed early can she survive okay on a reduced survivor benefit at the same time as the loss of that check.

the rest of the questions are easier . if you are not going to be dependent on the whims of markets and rates then take it early , no reason not to.

but if you are a nervous nelly type and need income from your portfolio will waiting for that much higher ss check let you cut portfolio withdrawals down to minimum forever once that check starts coming , and if anything happens to you does your wife have the stomach for money riding in the market?

that is something few men think about. widowed wives are a lot more gun shy of their own market investing to maintain income.


all the rest of the decisions are tax reasons .
That is the advantage of 62/70 especially on top of our pensions we have created a survivor income floor that is moreeeeee than adequate. That is one of the exact reasons for doing it. It provides for nursing home care out of fixed cash flow etc etc. investments become even less needed. The loss of two SS incomes will not have a real impact.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2014, 07:06 PM
 
Location: Las Vegas
13,888 posts, read 25,319,935 times
Reputation: 26382
Quote:
Originally Posted by lenora View Post
At age 60 you will be eligible to receive 71.5% of what H would have gotten... not 50%.
And of course, if you change your mind about marriage, as long as you wait until you are 60 years old to remarry - you can STILL claim your late husband's survivor benefit. Just sayin'.
Even better than I thought! Thank you!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2014, 03:25 AM
 
71,526 posts, read 71,712,424 times
Reputation: 49105
Quote:
Originally Posted by TuborgP View Post
That is the advantage of 62/70 especially on top of our pensions we have created a survivor income floor that is moreeeeee than adequate. That is one of the exact reasons for doing it. It provides for nursing home care out of fixed cash flow etc etc. investments become even less needed. The loss of two SS incomes will not have a real impact.
our plan is 62/70 but with the computations our planner is going to run the best tax situation may end up 62/66 with the ss funding some roth conversions at 66 bringing down our rmd's. i have over 7 figures in my deferred ira from my own contributions and roll overs from 401k plans to deal with..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2014, 06:41 AM
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
3,745 posts, read 4,216,823 times
Reputation: 6866
Quote:
Originally Posted by yellowsnow View Post
Even better than I thought! Thank you!
Yellowsnow, please call the 800 number or visit your Social Security office. Although there is a lot of criticism about some of the inexperienced reps, there are several easy questions they can answer: How much would I receive in survivor's benefit if I were to collect at age 60? Age 66? If you don't know how much you would receive on your own record, ask the same questions.

As long as you are able to provide his SSN, the amount of the benefit will pop up on the rep's computer screen. My ex isn't dead so I knew she couldn't tell me his PIA (amount he was receiving it at FRA) but she was able to tell me how much I would receive if I collected ex-spousal benefits. She also confided that she was going to take the same strategy as me - grab the ex's benefit at FRA and earn delayed credits on her own earnings record until she reached age 70.

In my case, the ex-spousal benefit is only $67 more than my FRA amount. So, it is worth it for me to earn the delayed retirement credits. However, if he were to die - the survivor's benefit would be more than twice my benefit and it would change my way of thinking. It is MUCH more likely that Congress will change the rules affecting delayed credits than change Survivor benefits. Thus, if I could comfortably live without claiming Survivor's benefits before my FRA, that is exactly what I would do. The 32% interest earned in delayed credits on my account would not be worth the risk of claiming reduced Survivor's benefit at age 60. I'm not sure if this applies to your situation (the ballpark numbers are important) but please, please dig a little deeper before making an irrevocable decision.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top