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.
Location: IN>Germany>ND>OH>TX>CA>Currently NoVa and a Vacation Lake House in PA
3,259 posts, read 4,329,532 times
Reputation: 13476
Advertisements
Most wealthy people I know got that way, because they are very careful with their finances. If you think they will leave that money sitting with the social security administration, you are crazy. Of course they are going to take the time to apply for it.
Location: IN>Germany>ND>OH>TX>CA>Currently NoVa and a Vacation Lake House in PA
3,259 posts, read 4,329,532 times
Reputation: 13476
Quote:
Originally Posted by nicet4
What I find totally shocking is the number that have elected to receive benefits at 62.
I'm not sure why that is shocking to you. I will receive a defined benefit pension, and there's no reason for me to work past 60. My pension will be supplemented with what I will draw at 62 on social security when I retire and then I will lose that supplement at 62. At that point, I will either have to suffer the loss of that income or apply for benefits under social security. If I was still working at that point I would obviously hold off, but since I will retire at 60 there's no reason for me to wait. Many people do not want to work past 62, so why should they wait to retire if they can make it at that point regardless of how they plan to retire.
For 75 and older it looks like 1.8 in 1,000 haven't for whatever reason. About one in 600?
What I find totally shocking is the number that have elected to receive benefits at 62.
nicet4 I am not shocked by the amount of people that apply. Most of them would be low income wage earners. They might even be part time. Even fultime at minimum wage they could just reach the income threshold that would take 1 dollar for every 2.
... Back when I was a very young man (mid-60's), I worked with a very-old (it's all relative, folks!) man, who had never signed-up for Social Security - from the Franklin D. Roosevelt Presidency. He'd worked for years - and was still working, because he needed to put enough into it, to help fund him to receive Social Security. I felt really-bad for the poor guy; he was pretty feeble.
But ... he's the only elder-person I ever knew who had never signed-up for Social Security ... And, he was pretty-much dirt-poor when we worked together.
...
I'm not sure why that is shocking to you. I will receive a defined benefit pension, and there's no reason for me to work past 60. My pension will be supplemented with what I will draw at 62 on social security when I retire and then I will lose that supplement at 62. At that point, I will either have to suffer the loss of that income or apply for benefits under social security. If I was still working at that point I would obviously hold off, but since I will retire at 60 there's no reason for me to wait. Many people do not want to work past 62, so why should they wait to retire if they can make it at that point regardless of how they plan to retire.
What about health insurance? There are some people could afford to stop working in terms of income, but not if they have to pay 100% of their health insurance premium before they are eligible for Medicare.
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.
