Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: SeekAndFind

1. Inflation.
2. Opportunity Cost.
3. Mortality tables.
4. Congressional whim.
5. Solvency.
6. Current v. future tax rates

Figure in those factors and 62 is the correct answer for the financially assured and astute.

The real stupidity is the “professionals” in articles like this who continue to ignore these key concepts. Makes you think they just want everyone to work to fund the Deep State until they die at their place of work.


13 posted on 05/03/2020 9:08:39 PM PDT by Uncle Miltie (BOYCOTT CHINA! - spread the word .... (China is the Sick Man of Asia with a very small penis))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Uncle Miltie

This author displayed his ignorance when he wrote: “ It may be beneficial to [commence] benefits early so you can get the most out of what you have worked your whole life to build.” There is no building anything for yourself when it comes to SS.

The big unknown and crap shoot in all this, outside the terminally ill, no one knows his death date. If my father began benefits at 62, he would have collected for 7 years, and my mother would have had a greatly reduced benefit for the next 27 years. My in-laws saved nothing for retirement, SS was their pension, took as soon as they could get their hands on it. They slid into elder poverty and death eventually relieved them of their situation. If they delayed while they continued to work to full retirement age, instead of spending new found money, it would have been better for them. Hence, if one doesn’t “need” the money, is disciplined to invest what $$$ remains after it has been taxed for 8 years, and stay ahead of inflation, then I can see the scenario where 62 could be the right age.

On the other hand, under current law (solvency), one can gain an ~8%/year increased benefit by delaying up to age 70. 8% today is significantly greater than the “official” inflation rate, and most average people won’t make by investing. So if you don’t “need” it early, look at it as a future bonus, perhaps as the $$$ to fund med-supp expenses.

I’ll cross this bridge when I get there, but leaning to not take it early. I will re-evaluate my situation every year starting at age 62 as conditions may change, as you have listed the most common factors to consider. So I guess I got the answer wrong, or might belong in the not so financially astute crowd. The only way one will know (but can’t) is to run the numbers after one dies.


48 posted on 05/04/2020 4:44:47 AM PDT by Susquehanna Patriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson