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 06-03-2019, 01:08 PM
 
Location: Kountze, Texas
226 posts, read 33,848 times
Reputation: 207

Advertisements

Our planner says DH to take it at 70 and me 63 - he already gets a supplement in his annuity that is approximately what he would get at 62 (less actually) - which means at 62 he will lose $$$$ from his annuity until he takes SSA at 70. - but which also means - once he doesn't get that supplement - he won't be limited in income from the earnings limits like he is now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-03-2019, 03:17 PM
 
Location: Las Vegas & San Diego
224 posts, read 37,566 times
Reputation: 230
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
I have heard Susie just spew out across the board many times to take ss at 70 , not for some , no exceptions given ,just bad one size fits all advice .... I lost track of all the poor one size fits all advice I have heard her say over the years...her show is not for financially savvy people nor for those who need a good financial road map .

It is pretty much for those struggling
Suze has also suggested that need to have at least $5M in assets if retire early

Quote:
“You need at least $5 million, or $6 million,” she said. “Really, you might need $10 million.” & “…. you see that you’re going to need $5 million to retire and all you have is $800,000.”
Very poor advice for most.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2019, 04:04 PM
 
71,946 posts, read 71,971,035 times
Reputation: 49506
Her audience for the most part reminds me of the classic movie the dirty dozen... her primary audience is so lacking in financial knowledge that they can’t tell if the information she gives is good or bad for them ...she can tell them anything
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2019, 06:24 PM
 
Location: Metropolis IL
1,604 posts, read 1,897,475 times
Reputation: 2352
Does Orman still have a show? Last I saw of her, she was peddling some FICO credit report course with infomercials, and I haven't seen that in a couple of years.

Lots of detractors with many subscribers on YouTube. I think her star waned some time ago.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2019, 06:26 PM
 
Location: SoCal
13,377 posts, read 6,390,348 times
Reputation: 9967
I think she retiredalready. She’s 70 or older.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2019, 07:07 PM
 
Location: Las Vegas & San Diego
224 posts, read 37,566 times
Reputation: 230
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewbieHere View Post
I think she retiredalready. She’s 70 or older.
Suze essentially retired about 4 years ago when her show was cancelled and then unretired about a year or so ago - she has some seminars and is on PBS now and then. Her unretirement is part of the reason she now says to wait till 70 and need $5M to retire. She is 67 I believe.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2019, 05:13 AM
 
Location: Outside US
1,249 posts, read 495,500 times
Reputation: 1622
As stated by others, audience not very financially literate

But preaching of 70 and needing $5-6 million
Is bad and over-the-top.

The average life expectancy is 78, iirc.

And it's actually declining.

8 years to live in SS and $5-6 mill?

How many Americans can reach the $5-6 mill mark?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2019, 08:30 AM
 
Location: SoCal
13,377 posts, read 6,390,348 times
Reputation: 9967
Quote:
Originally Posted by Returning2USA View Post
As stated by others, audience not very financially literate

But preaching of 70 and needing $5-6 million
Is bad and over-the-top.

The average life expectancy is 78, iirc.

And it's actually declining.

8 years to live in SS and $5-6 mill?

How many Americans can reach the $5-6 mill mark?
Right, not the crowd she preaches to either.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2019, 10:37 AM
 
Location: Outer Boroughs, NYC
1,667 posts, read 1,313,173 times
Reputation: 1076
Quote:
Originally Posted by Returning2USA View Post
As stated by others, audience not very financially literate

The average life expectancy is 78, iirc.

And it's actually declining.

8 years to live in SS and $5-6 mill?

How many Americans can reach the $5-6 mill mark?
You might check your own literacy before you criticize others. US life expectancy *at birth* is 78. You're well past middle age when you're deciding when to take SS. You've survived childhood illnesses, you've survived risk-taking foolishness as a teenager, and your yardstick is a different life expectancy. All financial analysts use life expectancy at age 65 or (at least) the year you wish to take Social Security. That is well into your 80s.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ddeemo View Post
Suze essentially retired about 4 years ago ...Her unretirement is part of the reason she now says to wait till 70 and need $5M to retire. She is 67 I believe.
Right, just like Obama was born in Kenya, and the Sandy Hook school shootings were "made up by the media."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2019, 12:02 PM
 
71,946 posts, read 71,971,035 times
Reputation: 49506
Quote:
Originally Posted by masonbauknight View Post
You might check your own literacy before you criticize others. US life expectancy *at birth* is 78.a."
i certainly think you should do that ..

life expectancy from birth is meaningless when talking about social security... the odds of one in a couple at 65 seeing 90 are almost 50% .. the odds of seeing 80 for one in a couple is a whopping 89% . for a single woman it is 72 % and 62% for a man .. so i guess you can improve your own financial literacy as well right here .

looking at the group from birth has no bearing at all on what happens once the sick , weak , and drug and alcohol abusers are out of the equation as well as infant deaths . you need to look at life expectancy from the 60's on .. the truth is while the peak ages are falling , more of us are living longer .

a child born in 2014 has a life expectancy (average age at death) of 79. However, the median age of death for the same child is 83, and the modal (most common) age at death is 89!




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
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