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 11-04-2018, 09:53 AM
 
8,874 posts, read 5,154,226 times
Reputation: 10171

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
we were looking in to a condo too if we would have done the reverse to purchase since it was so much more money for the condo then we would spend conventionally . but it just ate up equity in no time and even though in the long run that was the plan , it was just to fast of an acceleration for our taste ..
I see; thanks for clarifying.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-04-2018, 01:44 PM
 
1,734 posts, read 1,952,756 times
Reputation: 3901
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
or how markets do if you take ss earlier and leave assets invested instead of spending down delaying .

or whether you want to bet more on longevity or markets ,rates and inflation for the bigger chunk of your income .

so there are other factors too .

the lines kind of intersect between average returns on a balanced fund and delaying ss to 70 at around age 90-95 . at that point you would be equal either way.
Respectfully, there are other motivations for delaying as well. In Dave Ramsey's words, I am motivated to "change my family tree" by leaving enough of a legacy to my three children that it is life-changing (as in, have enough start-up capital for a business; buy a couple of cash-flowing properties outright). Personally, I do not have the DNA of an entrepreneur and am grateful that I recognized it early, lol!

The self-indulgent snowflake will likely blow it, and will look back ruefully when she's my age. C'est la vie.

One of them will in fact use it to start his business, although he does not know it yet.

The delusional snowflake one is learning life's lessons. IMHO, that learning is a really good antidote for delusional thinking, lolol!!!

When I buy the farm, there will be no question about equal treatment. They will have no grounds for estrangement.

No guarantees, but IMHO delaying until 70 is one of my controllables, and I'm a-gonna control it. That's my story and I'm sticking to it!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-04-2018, 02:08 PM
 
71,899 posts, read 71,942,576 times
Reputation: 49436
there is nothing inherent in delaying that automatically gives you more money to spend or a bigger balance for heirs compared to filing early .you see this myth all the time posted , how waiting gives them more money . but that is not always true . the only time it is true is if you work and delay .

not spending down invested assets when taking ss early or investing money you get that could be invested if you take ss early can add a lot of money back in to the equation . by the same token , to match a balanced portfolio under average market outcomes ,delaying requires you or a spouse to live to 90 to equal that amount .

so it really boils down to betting on at least seeing average market outcomes if you take ss early or betting on you or a spouse living to age 90 if delaying ss since that is what it takes to get to the tipping point .

if you or a spouse live to 95 then delaying ss wins . if you and your spouse live less than 90 , then taking ss early and investing wins . the odds really favor investing and taking ss early but that does not mean it is guaranteed .

both can provide higher income along the way . if markets are at least average outcomes then raises can be taken when you invest and take ss early all along the way possibly even beating the higher ss check by age 70 .
so don't get to wrapped up in thinking one is better than the other because they are both dependent on certain expectations . the real deal is do you want to bet more on markets or more on longevity for the "same " potential income and balance?

you can see taking ss early and not spending down assets to delay can be matched by delaying ss to 70 but you need to see at least 90 to equal the balanced funds return in average outcomes . so delaying until 70 does not guarantee more money for heirs .









Last edited by mathjak107; 11-04-2018 at 02:25 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2018, 06:33 AM
 
71,899 posts, read 71,942,576 times
Reputation: 49436
Quote:
Originally Posted by Petunia 100 View Post
You can be out of the home for up to one continuous year. After that, the note is due. If you return home before 1 year and then leave again, the clock starts over.

I look at it this way: if I am unable to live in my own home and care for myself, then I shouldn't. This is true whether I have a traditional mortgage, a reverse mortgage, or no mortgage at all.
the biggest problem is that equity gets eaten up so fast that many times reverse mortgages only postpone the inevitable and then the people involved have no equity to move to a better situation , which they should have done before draining the equity in the first place . .

things like living in a rural area with no public transportation and not being able to drive anymore or needing to be closer to family are the most frequent issues hit .

so the loan drains the equity and then they have no funds to eventually move .

what many don't realize is the lender can order you to fix and repair things you may not have the funds for. maintaining the house is in every agreement . those who resort to these loans usually are doing so because they are underfunded as it is .

also Anyone who lives in a senior’s home that is not named on a reverse loan will need to either move or pay off the loan when the borrower dies or moves out of the residence. Many borrowers and their family members do not understand this risk and do not adequately prepare. In fact, this very issue has made the news when a non-borrowing spouse was forced to move following the death of a borrowing spouse.

Last edited by mathjak107; 11-05-2018 at 06:56 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2018, 09:04 AM
 
13,993 posts, read 7,458,129 times
Reputation: 25567
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
there is nothing inherent in delaying that automatically gives you more money to spend or a bigger balance for heirs compared to filing early .

I don't get it. I'm career high income within a few percent of the maximum possible Social Security benefit. If I start collecting at age 62, I'll collect $198,144 in Social Security checks by the time I'm 70. $24,768/year for 8 years. In my financial planning, $200K is a fairly small fraction of my net worth. It's not like I wouldn't be hitting my savings and wealth fairly heavily over those 8 years if I'm not working. The thing that changes my math is my retirement date, not when I start collecting Social Security. I'm going to defer collecting until age 70 as insurance against outliving my savings. I'll be fine with my house and $44K of mostly tax-free Social Security check and my house is my long term care policy. I'm not trying to maximize return. I'm trying to minimize the risk of running out of money if I live a decade+ beyond what is my most likely outcome. I'm not trying to die with the largest possible pile of money.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2018, 09:17 AM
 
Location: RVA
2,174 posts, read 1,272,632 times
Reputation: 4497
Yup. About same numbers and atitude for me. I will delay as long as it makes sense. Which on paper is age 69. Collect at 69, and if you regret not waiting until 70, then just pay back what you got the last year, interest free and start again. Or keep it and keep on trucking.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2018, 09:23 AM
 
Location: 5,400 feet
2,627 posts, read 2,587,381 times
Reputation: 3685
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeoffD View Post
I don't get it. I'm career high income within a few percent of the maximum possible Social Security benefit. If I start collecting at age 62, I'll collect $198,144 in Social Security checks by the time I'm 70. $24,768/year for 8 years. In my financial planning, $200K is a fairly small fraction of my net worth. It's not like I wouldn't be hitting my savings and wealth fairly heavily over those 8 years if I'm not working. The thing that changes my math is my retirement date, not when I start collecting Social Security. I'm going to defer collecting until age 70 as insurance against outliving my savings. I'll be fine with my house and $44K of mostly tax-free Social Security check and my house is my long term care policy. I'm not trying to maximize return. I'm trying to minimize the risk of running out of money if I live a decade+ beyond what is my most likely outcome. I'm not trying to die with the largest possible pile of money.

Your situation demonstrates that there is no simple answer to "when should I start taking S/S?" Every person's situation is different enough that every person needs to analyze the situation for themselves.


We retired before 62, so we knew what our s/s contributions and estimated benefits would be. Before age 62, I looked at the present value of our benefits for beginning at every age from 62 to 70 and discounted them all back to age 62 using standard actuarial tables of anticipated life expectancy at every age. For example, life expectancy at age 62 is 21-23 years depending on which table one uses. The highest present value for us, assuming average life expectancy at every age, was to begin at age 62 or 63. We began at 62 and, 8 years later, have no regrets. If we outlive our average life expectancy, then we may have made the wrong decision as to our overall benefits but I expect we will still have no regrets.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2018, 10:58 AM
 
Location: We_tside PNW (Columbia Gorge) / CO / SA TX / Thailand
22,687 posts, read 40,050,764 times
Reputation: 23831
Quote:
Originally Posted by Perryinva View Post
Yup. About same numbers and atitude for me. I will delay as long as it makes sense. Which on paper is age 69. Collect at 69, and if you regret not waiting until 70, then just pay back what you got the last year, interest free and start again. Or keep it and keep on trucking.
This 'pay-back' SS is still an option?

I thought they closed that loop-hole ~3 yrs ago.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2018, 11:32 AM
 
71,899 posts, read 71,942,576 times
Reputation: 49436
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeoffD View Post
I don't get it. I'm career high income within a few percent of the maximum possible Social Security benefit. If I start collecting at age 62, I'll collect $198,144 in Social Security checks by the time I'm 70. $24,768/year for 8 years. In my financial planning, $200K is a fairly small fraction of my net worth. It's not like I wouldn't be hitting my savings and wealth fairly heavily over those 8 years if I'm not working. The thing that changes my math is my retirement date, not when I start collecting Social Security. I'm going to defer collecting until age 70 as insurance against outliving my savings. I'll be fine with my house and $44K of mostly tax-free Social Security check and my house is my long term care policy. I'm not trying to maximize return. I'm trying to minimize the risk of running out of money if I live a decade+ beyond what is my most likely outcome. I'm not trying to die with the largest possible pile of money.
Whether it is money you have invested being spent , or money you could invest that is being spent , if you are talking spending 8 years of ss , that will lose as much as 30 years of compounding on it.

we were layng out almost 100k a year between our draw and the ss i was not collecting while delaying. plus no spousal of 4500 a year until i filed . i filed at 65 .


The math has already been done by kitces as well as the internal roi on delaying ss . You are just choosing more longevity risk with a higher ss check delaying or more market risk taking it early .

Last edited by mathjak107; 11-05-2018 at 12:23 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2018, 02:52 PM
 
3,158 posts, read 5,202,151 times
Reputation: 1775
Quote:
Originally Posted by StealthRabbit View Post
This 'pay-back' SS is still an option?

I thought they closed that loop-hole ~3 yrs ago.
I believe it's now an option only if it is done within the first 12 months of starting benefits. After that, it's too late.

Last edited by ged_782; 11-05-2018 at 03:19 PM..
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