Originally posted by Sparko
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Economics 301 Guidelines
This is the area where economic theories and trends are discussed.
Balance your checkbook before participating.
Forum Rules: Here
Balance your checkbook before participating.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
When to Draw Social Security Retirement
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostAt my age, I had everything moved to a "guaranteed minimum" rate. The benefit, of course, is that I never make less than 4% on money -- the downside is my earnings are capped at 10%. I can certainly live with that, as - even if the stock market were to crash, I'm still going to get the minimum 4%. In addition, all of the money I put in gets "credited" at 110%.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostOne thing I am doing right now to maximize my retirement is that I have my 401K mostly in growth stocks and index funds, which can be dangerous this close to retirement when they say you should be moving stocks into bluechips and bonds to maximize income and minimize risk. But if I did that I wouldn't have enough by the time I retire.
I am thinking of switching everything to bonds and safe investments a few months before the next election, just in case all that nonsense causes the stock market to crash. Then if things pick up again, move back to growth stocks.
Leave a comment:
-
One thing I am doing right now to maximize my retirement is that I have my 401K mostly in growth stocks and index funds, which can be dangerous this close to retirement when they say you should be moving stocks into bluechips and bonds to maximize income and minimize risk. But if I did that I wouldn't have enough by the time I retire.
I am thinking of switching everything to bonds and safe investments a few months before the next election, just in case all that nonsense causes the stock market to crash. Then if things pick up again, move back to growth stocks.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostDoes your company match any amount dollar for dollar? This is what I often could not get the young kids I hired to understand --- it's FREE MONEY. Our company matched 100% of what I put in, up to 6% of my salary, so I always maxed it out.
But you like your job, yes?
There are ways to shift or transfer your 401(k) to annuitize it for guaranteed minimum income for life, and in the case of my 403(b), that entire amount gets distributed even if I die -- to my wife, and in case she dies, to my grandkids, etc...
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostI am 58 right now. I have been thinking about it. I didn't really have much 401K saved up until my current job which I have been at for only 12 years. So my main worry is how much I will have saved in my 401K by the time I am 67.
I am going to have to work at least until then in order for my social security check to even pretend to pay my monthly bills.
I would love to retire at 65, but at that age, I won't have enough SS to even pay my minimum monthly bills. That is all at my current salary, so since SS is based on the average of your highest 35 years salaries, I am hoping I will get enough raises over the years to maybe be afford the minimum monthly expenses on my SS, and use my 401K as my buffer for various other expenses that come up, or for discretionary spending.
I don't think the take it now and invest it would work for me. A couple of years of lower SS payments wouldn't add up to much, even invested, and then the rest of your life you are getting those smaller payments.
The biggest problem of course is you don't know how long you will live. If I only live to 77 (10 years of retirement) then I have plenty. If I live to 90, not so much. Of course I could just drop dead before retirement and then all those years of savings are wasted.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostOK - I'm there this month - the magic 66 years old, which, for me, is FTA - Full Retirement Age.
At 66, of course, you can draw your full amount, but waiting another year increases that amount by 8%.
Each additional year you wait, another 8%, up to a total of 32% growth at 70.
It's crazy, because if you wait till 70, your monthly payment is higher for the rest of your life, but you've given up 4 years of payments at "full" amount.
It's a numbers game, of course, depending on how long you will live, whether it makes more sense to start at 66 or 70 or somewhere in between.
I google "when to start drawing Social Security", and I get varying advice.
WAIT if at all possible, if you don't really need the money now.
Or start drawing it, but invest it without using it - the "take and invest" strategy.
Anybody been there? Thought this through?
I am 58 right now. I have been thinking about it. I didn't really have much 401K saved up until my current job which I have been at for only 12 years. So my main worry is how much I will have saved in my 401K by the time I am 67.
I am going to have to work at least until then in order for my social security check to even pretend to pay my monthly bills.
I would love to retire at 65, but at that age, I won't have enough SS to even pay my minimum monthly bills. That is all at my current salary, so since SS is based on the average of your highest 35 years salaries, I am hoping I will get enough raises over the years to maybe be afford the minimum monthly expenses on my SS, and use my 401K as my buffer for various other expenses that come up, or for discretionary spending.
I don't think the take it now and invest it would work for me. A couple of years of lower SS payments wouldn't add up to much, even invested, and then the rest of your life you are getting those smaller payments.
The biggest problem of course is you don't know how long you will live. If I only live to 77 (10 years of retirement) then I have plenty. If I live to 90, not so much. Of course I could just drop dead before retirement and then all those years of savings are wasted.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostYou make a lot of sense, and you echo some of the things I've already considered, and identified some of the important factors that need addressed.
I was actually concerned that, even though I make a decent salary as a pastor, I had long ago (foolishly) chosen the conscientious objection option - which means NONE of my income from religious service is taxable for social security purposes. (IRS can still tax the dickens out of me) A consequence of that is the fact that, unless I worked a secular job, I would have ZERO social security benefits available.
Fortunately, the 10 years I spent with a gas compression company provided not only a very decent 401(k) (matching 100% up to 6% of what I invested), but also gave me the opportunity to shore up (and qualify for) social security benefits. I maxed out both the 401(k) and SS amounts every chance I got, which, in later years, allow extended "catch up" amounts.
One of the factors I just found out was that your benefit is figured on an AVERAGE of your best 35 years of paying in. My concern was that, for the last 7 years (and for the foreseeable future) I am contributing ZERO, and each zero year would bring down the average. I was assured that was not true - that my minimum benefit has already been established, and cannot "slide back". That takes away some urgency, and I no longer feel pressured that I have to decide this NOW.
It looks like it comes down to two factors them.
A) Do I really need the income right now? Answer is no - Church pays a livable wage, and I have plenty in savings from my time with the gas compression company.
2) Do I expect to live longer than the average? If my Dad is any indicator, he lived to be 98 and was in pretty good health for an old guy, except for being stone deaf from the war.
I HAD been 50/50 on what to do - but now I'm leaning toward holding off to 70 unless there's some compelling reason to start taking SS retirement money sooner.
Thanks for your thoughts!
If I picked your birth year correctly, here's how they calculate your benefit:
https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10070-1953.pdf
If I got that wrong, here's the main page:
https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/?topic=Retirement
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by myth View PostWell, this is gonna sound morbid, but I'd say statistically your best bet is to assume that you'll live the average amount of time. The life expectancy for a male in the US I think is around 78 (you may want to fact check me). I'd run the numbers to see how long the extra 32% takes to make up for 4 years of no payments. I'm guessing somewhat more than 8 years. Which basically would mean you're only better off waiting till 70 to draw if you live longer than 78. (check me on that, you'll want to me absolutely sure)
So...that means practical situations unique to you may matter more. If you think that once you fully retire, the payment at age 66 benefits would allow you to maintain your standard of living, then that means you'd have enough money in retirement...so why wait for the higher payment? Of course, if you're got plenty of income now and you just don't need the money at all (doubtful -- I know how pastors get paid, brother) then I'm not really sure it matters...and I'd probably just wait until 70 to draw benefits as a backstop against the unlikely chance I run out of other retirement funds around age 90-110.
I dunno, am I making sense here at all? My parents are near your age. They're going for a meeting with SSA this coming week it is. My mom just lost her job (company closed down her branch) and she's only a few years from 66. So she's trying to decide if she should take early SSA at reduced benefits and work part time, or find some other job for a few years and retire at full benefits. Part of that depends....because apparently it's a thing to take early benefits, then switch and draw a spousal benefit calculated at 50% of your spouse's benefit calculated at full retirement age. So they've been playing with numbers to see what works best.
I was actually concerned that, even though I make a decent salary as a pastor, I had long ago (foolishly) chosen the conscientious objection option - which means NONE of my income from religious service is taxable for social security purposes. (IRS can still tax the dickens out of me) A consequence of that is the fact that, unless I worked a secular job, I would have ZERO social security benefits available.
Fortunately, the 10 years I spent with a gas compression company provided not only a very decent 401(k) (matching 100% up to 6% of what I invested), but also gave me the opportunity to shore up (and qualify for) social security benefits. I maxed out both the 401(k) and SS amounts every chance I got, which, in later years, allow extended "catch up" amounts.
One of the factors I just found out was that your benefit is figured on an AVERAGE of your best 35 years of paying in. My concern was that, for the last 7 years (and for the foreseeable future) I am contributing ZERO, and each zero year would bring down the average. I was assured that was not true - that my minimum benefit has already been established, and cannot "slide back". That takes away some urgency, and I no longer feel pressured that I have to decide this NOW.
It looks like it comes down to two factors them.
A) Do I really need the income right now? Answer is no - Church pays a livable wage, and I have plenty in savings from my time with the gas compression company.
2) Do I expect to live longer than the average? If my Dad is any indicator, he lived to be 98 and was in pretty good health for an old guy, except for being stone deaf from the war.
I HAD been 50/50 on what to do - but now I'm leaning toward holding off to 70 unless there's some compelling reason to start taking SS retirement money sooner.
Thanks for your thoughts!
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostAs far as the SSA, there is no limit. IRS can tax your earnings (not more than 85% of your SS income in any case) depending on your tax bracket.
I plan to continue at my current church at least to age 70, if they'll allow me. So far, we're on a pretty good run, growing, and getting along.
My plan was -- IF I start receiving at 66 -- to invest HALF that money in my current 403(b) and the other half as "principle only" payments on my house.
Here's the challenge...
The money "grows" at 8% per year for 4 years, as long as you don't touch it.
If you start receiving it at FRA, you are locked into the lower amount, but you'll have 48 months of that received before age 70.
So it's not just "find something else that pays you 8% or better" - it's find a way to invest that money while you're collecting it that, in addition to the 48 months you receive, offsets the gain for waiting.
Example:
If your FRA amount is 1000/month (round figure), and you start taking it at age 66, you'll have received 48,000 by age 70, then 1,000 / month for life.
If you WAIT to start taking it at age 70, you'd start receiving 1,320 a month, but you've missed out on the previous 48,000.
I'm still trying to decide. The biggest factor is -- none of us knows how long we will live.
So...that means practical situations unique to you may matter more. If you think that once you fully retire, the payment at age 66 benefits would allow you to maintain your standard of living, then that means you'd have enough money in retirement...so why wait for the higher payment? Of course, if you're got plenty of income now and you just don't need the money at all (doubtful -- I know how pastors get paid, brother) then I'm not really sure it matters...and I'd probably just wait until 70 to draw benefits as a backstop against the unlikely chance I run out of other retirement funds around age 90-110.
I dunno, am I making sense here at all? My parents are near your age. They're going for a meeting with SSA this coming week it is. My mom just lost her job (company closed down her branch) and she's only a few years from 66. So she's trying to decide if she should take early SSA at reduced benefits and work part time, or find some other job for a few years and retire at full benefits. Part of that depends....because apparently it's a thing to take early benefits, then switch and draw a spousal benefit calculated at 50% of your spouse's benefit calculated at full retirement age. So they've been playing with numbers to see what works best.
Leave a comment:
widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
Leave a comment: