Anyone depressed about having to delay retirement due to inflation/stock market? (weather, moving)

[otterhere]

Originally Posted by Teacher Terry

Kosh55, no thanks to that type of life. I have worked hard all my life and now it’s my time to enjoy myself.

Some people actually enjoy economizing. W-O-R-K isn't a four-letter word in everyone's vocabulary.

[Kosh55]

Originally Posted by elnrgby

One solution that I do not see mentioned is to make SS the identical monthly amount for every qualified former tax contributor to SS, like UBI for all retirees. It would penalize higher lifelong earners/contributors (including me), but in terms of fairness, it would be somehow easier to swallow than means testing. Plus it would not require any of the complex administration required for means testing - in fact it would greatly reduce SS administration.

This is an EXCELLENT idea. They could probably do away with Food Stamps too

[leadfoot4]

Originally Posted by elnrgby

One solution that I do not see mentioned is to make SS the identical monthly amount for every qualified former tax contributor to SS, like UBI for all retirees. It would penalize higher lifelong earners/contributors (including me), but in terms of fairness, it would be somehow easier to swallow than means testing. Plus it would not require any of the complex administration required for means testing - in fact it would greatly reduce SS administration.

But you're overlooking something. Most of us retirees planned our retirements on the SS payment that the SSA said we'd be getting in retirement. Yes, it varies, among retirees, but it is what it is, and that's the number we planned with.

Having said that, are you talking about implementing something like that for current retirees, or new retirees, beginning at some point in the future? If you're talking about for all retirees, including the present, then you ARE talking about "means testing", in a way, because while I wasn't a "high earner" therefore a "big SS check recipient", I'm by no means at the bottom of the scale, either.

Consequently, I might be in the bracket of people who could possibly lose money. When I commenced my retirement, 14 years ago, I calculated things on what I would get from SS, going forward, and not figuring on any cuts.

[elnrgby]

Originally Posted by leadfoot4

But you're overlooking something. Most of us retirees planned our retirements on the SS payment that the SSA said we'd be getting in retirement. Yes, it varies, among retirees, but it is what it is, and that's the number we planned with.

Having said that, are you talking about implementing something like that for current retirees, or new retirees, beginning at some point in the future? If you're talking about for all retirees, including the present, then you ARE talking about "means testing", in a way, because while I wasn't a "high earner" therefore a "big SS check recipient", I'm by no means at the bottom of the scale, either.

Consequently, I might be in the bracket of people who could possibly lose money. When I commenced my retirement, 14 years ago, I calculated things on what I would get from SS, going forward, and not figuring on any cuts.

No, I am not talking about anything that has ever been mentioned as a real possibility. Just theoretical. I have no idea what will happen. Nobody has any idea what will happen.

I made my retirement plans with the expectation that I'd get 3/4 of the SS income shown in mySSA calculator. If there is means testing (ie, more means testing than what is already included in computation of soc security income & taxation of it), I could get less than 3/4, or even nothing (because I have other means).

[TwinbrookNine]

Originally Posted by whateverblahblahblah

I was planning on retiring in 5 years or so, but now it looks like it will be more like 10 years since inflation has shot up and the stock market has gone down the toilet. From what I've read, it looks like things will suck for at least the next couple of years, possibly longer, especially if the economy craters. About a year ago, I penciled in 2027 for my retirement year but that just isn't happening unless a miracle occurs.

I've hated working for decades. I hate waking up at an ungodly hour, fighting traffic for 3 hours a day round trip, staring at boring things that I don't care about on a monitor for 8 hours a day, and wearing a fake smile around bosses and coworkers who I don't particularly like and would rather not deal with.

I've been in a bad mood lately, but I figure it's beyond my control, so why worry about it?

You're pretty much exactly like me - except that I liked my work. I did save my pennies and avoided shelling out for "toys" to impress my friends and lived a (relatively) modest life. Retired at 54. Ended all "investing" at the same time. I got all the cash I'll ever need and sleep til 11 if I want to.

[miu]

Owning a home in New Hampshire means high and every increasing property taxes, so I will never be able to completely retire. And I am not depressed about having to work because I enjoy being active and productive, but I really do resent that the cost of public education keeps increasing, and since I chose not to have children, there should be a point where I am no longer forced to invest in other people's children.

I'm almost 64 years old, when can I start investing in myself? And I do find that parents have an annoying attitude of entitlement. Plus once their children have graduated from high school, parents tend to sell their homes to move to areas with lower property taxes and terrible schools. So they never really pay enough in taxes to offset what school services they have used for their children.

[Wile E. Coyote]

Originally Posted by leadfoot4

But you're overlooking something. Most of us retirees planned our retirements on the SS payment that the SSA said we'd be getting in retirement. Yes, it varies, among retirees, but it is what it is, and that's the number we planned with.

Having said that, are you talking about implementing something like that for current retirees, or new retirees, beginning at some point in the future? If you're talking about for all retirees, including the present, then you ARE talking about "means testing", in a way, because while I wasn't a "high earner" therefore a "big SS check recipient", I'm by no means at the bottom of the scale, either.

Consequently, I might be in the bracket of people who could possibly lose money. When I commenced my retirement, 14 years ago, I calculated things on what I would get from SS, going forward, and not figuring on any cuts.

They've had that bolded note on the SS Statement about reduced payouts for more that 14 years. You've been warned!

[elnrgby]

Originally Posted by Wile E. Coyote

They've had that bolded note on the SS Statement about reduced payouts for more that 14 years. You've been warned!

The latest is that Biden wants to impose SS tax on people earning over $400k (in addition to current taxation up to $147k), with the doughnut hole of $147-400k income not taxed for SS gradually closing over the years as the lower limit gradually increases. This measure would be certain to pass since it has bipartisan support of 88% D and 79% R - as long as Biden does not load the bill (which he will almost certainly propose before the end of his term) with some other wildly unfundable elements. But I don't think it would entirely solve the problem of insufficient SS funds, simply because there aren't enough taxpayers making over $400k to add the necessary 25% of required SS funds.

[Wile E. Coyote]

Originally Posted by elnrgby

The latest is that Biden wants to impose SS tax on people earning over $400k (in addition to current taxation up to $147k), with the doughnut hole of $147-400k income not taxed for SS gradually closing over the years as the lower limit gradually increases. This measure would be certain to pass since it has bipartisan support of 88% D and 79% R - as long as Biden does not load the bill (which he will almost certainly propose before the end of his term) with some other wildly unfundable elements. But I don't think it would entirely solve the problem of insufficient SS funds, simply because there aren't enough taxpayers making over $400k to add the necessary 25% of required SS funds.

So, then they will pay people $399,999 and give them other perks (i.e. stock options, etc.). It would backfire. The money would be more certain if it changed the cutoff for the $147 to $175 or something. I think the over $400k thing works for regular income taxes more so; but, for SS it's mostly just a political ploy. They are perhaps basing the budget on tax money that is not easy to enforce. There are many tax professionals that spend a lot of time figuring out how to exploit the tax code (it goes without saying). Besides Revenue.... Income tax expense is one of the next best places to impact profits.

[Wile E. Coyote]

Originally Posted by miu

Owning a home in New Hampshire means high and every increasing property taxes, so I will never be able to completely retire. And I am not depressed about having to work because I enjoy being active and productive, but I really do resent that the cost of public education keeps increasing, and since I chose not to have children, there should be a point where I am no longer forced to invest in other people's children.

I'm almost 64 years old, when can I start investing in myself? And I do find that parents have an annoying attitude of entitlement. Plus once their children have graduated from high school, parents tend to sell their homes to move to areas with lower property taxes and terrible schools. So they never really pay enough in taxes to offset what school services they have used for their children.

I feel your pain. In Oregon, freezing property taxes at age 65 is on the ballot again. The problem is most people are not near enough to 65 and like someone else said parents are certainly not voting to reducing the tax base for schools. It forces one to consider relocating (or at least downsizing). Downsizing does not make sense with the overpricing at the low end at this time.