For every year that you postpone Social Security benefits, your total Social Security Benefits will increase by 8% (retiree, support)
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.
You can take your survivor if you are 60 or older and let yours accumulate until up to 70 to then switch to your own. This option only applies now to survivor benefits.
I often am perplexed by the folks who feel that they will live to 95 because one, or both, of their parents did. Genetics are certainly important, but lifestyle and simple chance also play a big part. In the mostly retired community in which I live, we have had 5 deaths in the last 5 years among my retired friends and nearby neighbors...two were vehicular accidents, one was an accident involving recreation/sport, one was suicide, and one was cancer. So only in the cancer death did genetics POSSIBLY have something to do with the death. The cancer death was also the only person over 80. All the other deaths were folks in their 60's, and in apparently good health. To me longevity is strictly a roll of the dice, so I'm not willing to forego all of my SS until 70, I might not make it that long. I have other sources of income though; I'll never be solely dependent on SS for most of my income, so I can't criticize the decisions of those who may be. I understand their worry, and desire to maximize their permanent monthly income.
I guess that we are splitting the difference on SS. Hubby is just filing his now, at 64, to replace one source of our income which was temporary and has just ended. This was according to our original retirement plan. I will wait and see. I'll probably delay for a year or three after I reach 62, but we'll see when the time comes.
Last edited by TheShadow; 08-04-2018 at 10:14 AM..
I wonder what the people who retired early and advocate for SS at 70, who burned through 1/2 of their retirement portfolio to fund their lifestyle from age 62-70- will think when SS is cut 40% in 15 years. They burned through their money waiting and their SS. When they die the kids are left with scraps.
Those people who got a smaller SS check starting at 62 did not burn through their assets and SS is a smaller amount of their income.
Then there are the ones like my wife and me. No kids, so no worries about leaving anyone anything.
I don't quite understand all the fervor over this subject and the adamant you should do it my way because that is the right way. Everyone is free to take Social Security whenever they want. There is no blanket right or wrong time for all.
The real benefit to delaying is when you work and delay. That can create the equal of as much as another 800k saved . For an underfunded retirement working and delaying can be a silver bullet .
But not everyone wants to or can keep working. If they are underfunded it is what it is .
But I always say if any one thinks working is difficult at 62 or it is hard finding a job at 62 try it at 80 if you have to.
Last edited by mathjak107; 08-04-2018 at 11:29 AM..
Okay, I'm sure this has been asked before, but I've forgotten. Hubby is 5 years older and just filed. If he passed away when I am 63 and not taking my own SS. Can I take survivor and wait til 68 or 70 than switch to my own ? Or do they make me take my own if I'm over 62, or over 65? Mine at 68 would be bigger than his at fra..
You can keep the survivor's benefit until you switch over to your own account at age 70 or 68 or whenever. You need to sketch out a plan and give it a little thought. I was sort of sleepwalking through the process.
We retired early on a decent pension program. My wife began drawing SS at age 62 but died when I was 58 and too young to draw on my own account. I was surprised that I was eligible for survivor benefits at age 60 because I didn't know about it -- I figured I had to wait until I was 62. So I recalculated my budget and cobbled together a lifestyle based on my pension and a small survivor's pension and survivor's social security...not touching my own. It worked fine and I have a comfortable life and do what I want and live within my means.
Now at age 70, I applied under my own account and will begin drawing the fully accrued social security that I didn't touch all those years. I'm a little gobsmacked at the difference this will make. I think that maybe I should have considered drawing a couple years earlier on my own account for the sake of getting a slightly reduced amount but for more years. On top of the increased social security, I need to start taking taxable cash out of my IRA next year. Of course, it's not a bad situation to be in but I probably could have planned this a little better. There are a few things that I need to do now (at 70) that I could have done a couple years ago but put off because of my lower income at the time.
I have yet to read anything that proves that statistically, you are more likely to live a long life if your immediate family dies at 90+.
What if you retired at 60 and wait to collect Social Security at 70 and die at age 80 and you are still trying to reach an age that breaks even. Your kids cannot collect your larger Social Security Check and you have less in your investment accounts because you raided them to make up for the missing Social Security checks from age 62-70. If you had collected at 62 and not raided your mutual funds and ETF's your kids will have lots of money to put their kids in college.
Aren't the kids full grown adults that should be out of the house and have jobs themselves by then? Don't worry about kids. You have lived your entire lives taking care of them, retirement is your time. I wouldn't have wanted my parents to worry a second about not enjoying themselves in retirement because they were concerned what they were going to leave me. After all, they did their job, I graduated college, have a house with two cars and a good income and my own money. Retired people need to take care of themselves first. If you really love these people, they should love you back and want you to spend it all on yourself. Not save as much as possible so they can do something stupid with it like put an addition to their home which makes no market sense, or waste it on expensive vacations trying to pretend they are rich and famous.
It is a silly game to be concerned if you will live long enough to get the full benefits of SS. The point to wait until age 70 is that is the max you can get, and it is only 8 freaking years from age 62. That's no reason not to wait, unless you have real issues such as health, so you take it early. You want a more secure future and that's the reason to wait until age 70 because it's guaranteed. Sure you could take it at age 62 and have this fantasy about the great returns you could get investing that money, but do you actually have a real history of making savvy investments? If so, then why do you need this tiny amount of money early if you are such a wizard of wall street to begin with? You are such a wizard at this, you should be one of the people not taking SS at all.
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.
