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.
It may not make sense in a lot cases . I need money to live as an example . It would be a bad idea to pay tax on social securiity . Then invest the social security and sell investments to live on and get taxed on those too
Noooooooo, as with many others in the forum you are living off of your pensions and investing your SS in taxable accounts.
like i say , for those with pensions that cover things the pay check never stopped .so that group does not fall under most of the the rules and strategies those developing their own income stream are subject to
IF, IF I were to retire at 65, and then come back and work again just so I could work and collect -- say from age 67-68 -- you can best believe I'd only make just enough to stay below any adverse income limits….which would likely mean only part-time work. I wasn’t planning on NOT working for two years, to come back and work fulltime anyway.
If I can only make 24K before 50% of my SS is taxed, then so be it. But I'm also not going to live poor or pull too much from my own accounts SOLEY to not have any Soc. Sec. taxed. I will have a pension, so I won't be able to earn even the 24K. I'll just have to cross this bridge when I get to it.
In any case, because of a job change I’ve been off the last six months, and not working is already feeling good. It’s not even a possibility that I would want to be off for two years and work full time ever again -- even if I would be able to collect and work. Double up by working part-time, maybe. But I'm not even sure about that. Just the thought of thinking about working at age 68 has me think: "Oh, hell no."
Don't think there are many that the pension would cover all their expenses without SS or dipping into their savings to wait for FRA or 70
Married couples each with pensions. I make my comment from info people have shared and the frequent surveys asking how much is your or families pension. The results surprise people and folks comment participants from in this forum are above average.
there is still a big difference between needing some income to assist vs needing to develop your own pensionized income that has to be safe ,secure and consistent through the worst of times .
once you need 3 to 4% inflation adjusted draws yearly the planning and strategies are more defined and options can be more limited . .
those who need very small draws because of pensions can go either way . they can go very aggressive in to investments since sequence risk and time are not factors . or they can go very very conservative because they need little in draw . or they can go somewhere in between .
for those developing their own pensionized income and needing about 4% inflation adjusted ,have a window they have to stay in like it or not , below which they can't support the draw reliably
Don't think there are many that the pension would cover all their expenses without SS or dipping into their savings to wait for FRA or 70
For a number of years the 62/70 was still available for many of us and folks were well schooled in how to do it from co-workers if no one else. Especially popular with couples each having their own pensions and used it to build a income ladder.
A. Couple of professional retires and each claim a survivor pension creating a income floor. Depending on the state and pension system that combined floor is quite possibly more than most couples retire on. You will often find teachers married to each other in this situation. Along with other public sector employees.
B. The spouse with the lower SS benefit claims a benefit on their own earnings at age 62. They will quite possibly never need or want to claim spousal on their spouses benefit.
C. At FRA the spouse with the higher benefit claims spousal on their spouses benefit. For most of us that was age 66. The benefit they receive is not half of their spouses age 62 benefit but half of what that spouses age 66 benefit would have been.
D. The higher earning spouse at a point after claiming spousal switches to their full benefit.
We did this with the exception being I took my full benefit this year at age 69. I have explained in previous posts my reason why deciding to not wait the additional time.
This was popular with people we worked and lived around in similar situations. The key thing is you are establishing a financial life style based on a much lower fixed income then you have at age 70.
As your income grows you begin to increase your taxable account investments and they begin to grow and increase your taxable portfolio and enable you to at some point not need your work place savings for special purchases or even to up your life style.
It was interesting in some of the surveys here how many people had high combined pension incomes.
like i say , for those with pensions that cover things the pay check never stopped .so that group does not fall under most of the the rules and strategies those developing their own income stream are subject to
Yes and thus my comment that the posted charts on break even are not applicable to many.
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.
