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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-25-2015, 02:55 PM
 
Location: Cape Elizabeth
425 posts, read 388,308 times
Reputation: 745

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
i got it ! wow---- from what is being said by ilovemycat , if you are under fra and work and go over your limit anything taken back from you also effects your portion of the kicker your spouse gets . i never knew that but it makes sense.

Thank you, Mathjak for getting it! Because, I couldn't really understand why we were fundamentally disagreeing! I couldn't get what you were driving at. But now we are on the same page.

Also, for skeptics out there, who say "how do we know ilovemycat is correct?", just go to ssa.gov and put the following in the search box "How Work Affects Your Benefits - Social Security". You will get a nice little pamphlet we used to give to people that explains it all.

Happy reading!

P.S. planted two new rose bushes. But, the trouble with living in Maine is rocks! New England rocks! Takes me forever to dig nice big holes. But, met so many friendly people who were walking by. I love it here!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-25-2015, 03:09 PM
 
71,778 posts, read 71,875,234 times
Reputation: 49336
i never knew they took back from both. but it does make sense.

thanks for the info
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2015, 03:37 PM
 
Location: RVA
2,172 posts, read 1,270,926 times
Reputation: 4492
Yes, of course. Dave asked if it affected HER benefits. It doesn't. If affects her small spousal kicker, which, again, she gets back at a later date when the DRCs kick in.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2015, 05:04 PM
 
Location: State of Grace
1,582 posts, read 1,139,316 times
Reputation: 2614
Something to think about....

As I've mentioned elsewhere in the 'retirement' section of CD, I'm reading hundreds of posts by folks who are contemplating waiting until age 67 or 70 (Canada is slightly different) to apply for SS (CPP in Canada). This might not be the brightest idea since most deaths occur between the ages of 50 and 65, and presently only 2% of the population lives to age 80 in N. America.

I know this is a bit of a shocker the first time you hear it, and it isn't in the government's best interest to make this data readily available, as the longer they aren't paying you, the more they get to keep, obviously. Delve into the world of medicine though and you'll find correct stats.

Just thought I should mention this. I certainly wouldn't bet the government that I'm going to live to age 70. Naturally, I'm aiming for 120 (God Willing), but I wouldn't base my financial situation on the best case scenario. Most of my family lives to within hollering distance of 100, but my mother didn't (72), and my brother didn't (55), and the only guarantee we have is that death is certain. I'd rather enjoy more time with my husband NOW on a little less money than count on being around to collect a larger amount later. YMMV.

Cheers,


Mahrie.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2015, 05:15 PM
 
71,778 posts, read 71,875,234 times
Reputation: 49336
As i also mentioned ,a statistic from birth is useless.

The reality is a 65 year old has better than a 50% chance of seeing their 80's and a 73% chance someone in a couple that is 65 will go beyond 85.

That is all that is important. The question is which side of the line are you on ?

Since you don't know you better plan like it is you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2015, 05:28 PM
 
Location: Cape Elizabeth
425 posts, read 388,308 times
Reputation: 745
Quote:
Originally Posted by Perryinva View Post
Yes, of course. Dave asked if it affected HER benefits. It doesn't. If affects her small spousal kicker, which, again, she gets back at a later date when the DRCs kick in.
Well, it depends on what HER's means! I had previously explained that if Dave's spouse was only receiving her own RETIREMENT benefits, it would have no effect. If she was just receiving "her small spousal kicker" of $129.00 yes, it would just affect that.

But, if she was only getting the small spousal kicker, it would be small because it would be a "combo - of her own retirement, and part of Dave's, so NO, she would not be getting DRC'S.

But, we were having his wife file JUST as HIS WIFE, at her FRA, which unfortunately is when Dave is not at his FRA. So, his work is the "problem".

She was not filing for her own retirement until she reached 70, and then she would get her DRC's.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2015, 09:27 PM
 
Location: State of Grace
1,582 posts, read 1,139,316 times
Reputation: 2614
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
As i also mentioned ,a statistic from birth is useless.

The reality is a 65 year old has better than a 50% chance of seeing their 80's and a 73% chance someone in a couple that is 65 will go beyond 85.

That is all that is important. The question is which side of the line are you on ?

Since you don't know you better plan like it is you.


I wasn't quoting statistics 'from birth'. If one makes it to 65 then what you say is true.

Relevant to contemplating early retirement is knowing that not everyone makes it to 70, or even 65.

(I'm 59 and have no intention of retiring unless I'm physically forced to do so. I love my work.)


Mahrie.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2015, 03:26 AM
 
71,778 posts, read 71,875,234 times
Reputation: 49336
but when discussing the odds of collecting ss or retirement planning there is never a reason to go back any earlier than starting where it counts when discussing AVERAGE life expectancy .

how many are dead prior to the decision is irrelevant and the reason any age prior has to be discounted.

the fact is if you make it until 65 odds are you will be here at 80 , that is what the numbers really tell us .if you are a couple the odds are one of you will be here until 85 or older and you have to plan accordingly.

while statistics are important to insurers the real deal is as humans statistics play no part at all. we can only have 2 outcomes. things work out as planned or they they don't . we are either dead or alive in this case .

dead requires no money or choices so unless you know you will die you have no choice but to assume it is you who will live.

that is what makes the choice about planning easy , dead requires little planning.

Last edited by mathjak107; 04-26-2015 at 04:53 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2015, 04:20 AM
 
Location: Colorado Springs
4,856 posts, read 4,969,586 times
Reputation: 17348
If we all knew when we were going to die it would make retirement planning a lot easier.

Worst case is you live to 105 but you run out of money much sooner than that.

That's why a SS plan that includes "file and suspend until 70" does the best job of mitigating that risk. It's a form of insurance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2015, 04:33 AM
 
71,778 posts, read 71,875,234 times
Reputation: 49336
i am not sure it mitigates anything . it just shifts the type of risk in many cases ,especially if retiring early and delaying.

if you lost the checks you never collected they are gone , if you spent down invested assets while waiting ,they are gone along with future compounding . if your spouse was to get a kicker off yours ,you delaying that has that gone too.


it really does not mitigate anything. it can just shift market and interest rate risk to longevity risk. .

about the only thing it does by filing and suspending is let you lay claim to checks between fra and 70 if you want a lump sum.

but that does not mean you will even come close to reach break even .

that would work far better for someone not retiring until 70 and working then anyone going out early who has a choice of spending down assets vs drawing ss..

that person with a choice would just be shifting from market and interest rate risk to betting on their own longevity risk.

if you live a long time ,actually past 84 the returns by waiting if you retired at 62 but delayed increase rapidly but you really have to bet on your own longevity since to really come out a head by a nice amount requires you to get to at least age 90 where a 5% real return can be had by waiting on an investment in yourself and what amounts to a gov't bond..

kind of a risky bet ,betting you will see 90 so you can have at least a 5% real return but one worth it if you do.

but i do agree if you will be working until 70 then laying claim with a file and suspend to a lump sum is a good idea with no downside at all..

a little known fact is singles can do this too.

Last edited by mathjak107; 04-26-2015 at 05:02 AM..
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
Similar Threads
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