Tap an IRA Early, Delay Social Security

[Perryinva]

I am not even a 15 percenter and that article is exactly what I Said I Was going to do many months ago. However, even though it is unlikely that we will have a million (pretax) banked, we do have the benefits of pensions, which makes delaying much easier. The debate has always been "does the reduction of savings now actually benefit the longevity of the savings later because the reduced early MRDs, and larger only 85% taxed COLA SS reduces needed withdrawals" outweighs the early living withdrawals to delay. The article suggests that is just the case, and my RIP and FIREcalc calcs at the time said the same thing. Its nice to get independent verification.

[Tall Traveler]

It's good information that I was already very aware of and does affect when I will start taking my 401K money our as well as social security. One thing that you can't plan on is changes in policy in the future. Best to use good advice when you get close to retirement to make sure your plan pencils out.

[GeoffD]

The nice thing about deferring Social Security until age 70 is that it's fully inflation-protected for the remainder of your life. It's the conservative bet to play.

Unless Congress starts indexing Social Security taxation to inflation, I'm looking to be 50% taxable on my Social Security check no matter what I do. I'll have to run the numbers when I get much closer to retiring 8 years from now to work out the best strategy to minimize Medicare premiums and income taxes. There are too many variables and unknowns.

[NewbieHere]

I'm only using the term one percenter drivel because other poster used it. I have no idea what $2 million belongs in what percent and what that entails. Is that for liquid asset, networth? Who knows and who cares. It's the vagueness that politicians been railing about.

[GeoffD]

Originally Posted by NewbieHere

I'm only using the term one percenter drivel because other poster used it. I have no idea what $2 million belongs in what percent and what that entails. Is that for liquid asset, networth? Who knows and who cares. It's the vagueness that politicians been railing about.

Top-20% household income starts at $111,000. More or less, that's upper middle class at least in the lower cost of living places. If you have an employer with a decent 401(k) match and do your best to max it out every year, it can pile up to $2 million in your work career. It's also tied into how aggressive your portfolio is and how the market performs over your work life.

For someone at $50K median household income, I don't see how it could be possible.

I think the whole $2 million thing is targeted at those upper middle class people with a poor savings rate. It's human nature to expand your spending to consume all your income.

[mathjak107]

2 million generates about 70k-80k , plus ss is a bit over 100-120k before taxes which here in nyc hardy makes you upper class . in fact it would be barely a middle class life style .

so it is going to be about location location location .

one other huge factor that creates more misery then any other .

drawing around 4% inflation adjusted assumes the complete consumption of all principals can happen by the 30th year . under worst case outcomes it will happen .

since you do not know whether you will be that worst case scenario , average or the best of times just like when working you need to have money tucked away .

well that money can't be counted as part of that income stream . whether it is for major expenses , long term care or healthcare costs that shoot up or just the fact you live beyond 30 years you do need to have money in reserve . so that does reduce the amounts that can be counted on income wise . i know we have 15% of the pie set a side and while invested we don't count it in the income stream since it could be depleted to zero as income .


the worst thing to have is no choices in life and choices take money , especially when it comes to your health and care