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.
but it can go both ways.....forced to retire or forced to work longer:
Jason Fichtner, an associate commissioner at the Social Security Administration, said the weak economy has led more people who lost their jobs to retire early. However, it also has forced some people hard-hit by the recession and in need of a bigger paycheck to push back retirement and stay in the work force longer.
retire at 62 or retire at 70:
People entitled to full benefits at 66 would receive 75 percent of their check if they began collecting four years early. Conversely, if they waited until they turned 70, collecting four years late, they would earn 32 percent more. They would receive the decreased — or increased — percentages for the rest of their life. (from the same article)
Yes, it's true - but how many people do you know doing it??? Here is article from my local paper Bergen Record NorthJersey.com: Forced to retire, some take Social Security early Plus with all the new reports of SS being in red already a lot of people will be taking at 62 and not waiting till 66 or 67 years
Yes, it's true - but how many people do you know doing it??? Here is article from my local paper Bergen Record NorthJersey.com: Forced to retire, some take Social Security early Plus with all the new reports of SS being in red already a lot of people will be taking at 62 and not waiting till 66 or 67 years
My father told me to work until 70 to make sure I got all of it. I said, "I might not live to be 70. I might die at 68 and worked all those extra years and got none of that "extra" monthly benefit".
I told him I'd be standing outside their door when they opened, on my 62nd birthday.
Well, I am 59 and as it turned out I'm on disability, so I have a medical review at age 63. I was told, based on my birthdate, my full retirement age is 66.
I was told by s.s. there is a social security fund and a disability fund. I read somewhere recently that the social security fund is ok on $$ until 2029. I'd be 78 at that time. So, yes, I wonder what happens after that.
I actaully know mnay that retired early because they don't expect to gain much by waiting a few years from their retirement estimates. I took my SS at 62 because I couod afford to;many can't as its too large a portion of what they plan on retiring with. My idea was always to take it at 62 while I still can enjoy retirement more.
Location: Finally escaped The People's Republic of California
11,314 posts, read 8,655,857 times
Reputation: 6391
Quote:
Originally Posted by texdav
. My idea was always to take it at 62 while I still can enjoy retirement more.
Now that's exactly what I was thinking, I need more money when I'm 62 than when I'm 80..................
which is how old I'd be when I recieved an equal amount of money for waiting...
I was let go 4 months ago after 34 years in Telecom, was not planning to retire, but it's not my skills
to get new job, its my age (58) and what I was paid, that makes the company's HR eyes glaze over. So
nothing is happening. If nothing comes up in the next year, the wife and I will close up shop and retire.
If we can afford it.
My father told me to work until 70 to make sure I got all of it. I said, "I might not live to be 70. I might die at 68 and worked all those extra years and got none of that "extra" monthly benefit".
I told him I'd be standing outside their door when they opened, on my 62nd birthday.
Well, I am 59 and as it turned out I'm on disability, so I have a medical review at age 63. I was told, based on my birthdate, my full retirement age is 66.
I was told by s.s. there is a social security fund and a disability fund. I read somewhere recently that the social security fund is ok on $$ until 2029. I'd be 78 at that time. So, yes, I wonder what happens after that.
You never know. We had a good friend who worked as a pharmacist until he was 69 and then came down with pancreatic cancer and died at 70. He had just decided to cash in when he turned 70. Very sad.
I was let go 4 months ago after 34 years in Telecom, was not planning to retire, but it's not my skills
to get new job, its my age (58) and what I was paid, that makes the company's HR eyes glaze over. So
nothing is happening. If nothing comes up in the next year, the wife and I will close up shop and retire.
If we can afford it.
I'm sorry to hear about your situation --The number of laid-off people taking early Social Security at 62, can be estimated. The number of laid-off 55-62 age people being forced by the job market to retire... whether financially 'ready' or not ... is anybody's guess. Most will be forced to take early 401K/IRA distributions, which will not be recovered and will also deflate future withdrawal potential.
However, successful response strategies will start to emerge before then! And, things will get better and recover ... at some point. Those best able to 'weather this storm' are those who can keep their focus on today (and tomorrow's) groceries, roof, car problems, insurance, etc. -- and not dwell on what might happen 10 years from now. These are the times when concepts of faith, hope and guts become real... and not just words.
For me the answer is almost a yes. I'm in a better situation then some. I am a gov't employee. Our current contract ends in 2013.
Currently those who retire under THIS contract have their healthcare plan for a cost of around $700. per year until they reach medicare age. I am 52.
I'm guessing that this benefit will be lost in the next contract. I'm also told that this is worth around 12-14 K a year...so this is a GREAT benefit. If I chose to stay after this contract and lost this benefit, my pension would never increase enough to compensate for the healthcare benefit........so in a way, many fellow employees think it would be foolish to stay after this contract.
Because we are fugal, and could also do other things, we could live comfortably on my pension along with this benefit. I'm planning to retiring next year because of it.
I plan on still working, and I know I will probably need to still contribute to SS so I do not have yearly zero's. I do not (YET) know too much about this whole thing....I need to learn much more.......in addition to my pension I have savings, a 401k, etc that I do not plan on touching, as the pension should be enough. Any working income will be extra, for extras....also, I'll be debt free.
Frank
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.
Here is article from my local paper Bergen Record 
Plus with all the new reports of SS being in red already a lot of people will be taking at 62 and not waiting till 66 or 67 years 
