Community Chat

[I am still oxox]

---

@Carmie wrote:

---

@Natasha218 wrote:

---

@Shelbelle wrote:

I did not realize it does go up annually between 62 and 65 by a small percentage.

---

      Actually, if you take you benefits at 62, it's reduced by quite a bit.  20% I believe. But it might be a tad less than that.    It's why many people opt not to take it at 62, if they have to.  Over your lifetime, you lose quite a bit of money.  

---

Many women and men take SS at age 62, then later go on SS under their spouses  benefits.  You can get up to half of your spouse's SS.

example:  wife collects $800 SS at age 62 under her own benefits.  Her spouse collects $2200 under his by waiting for full retirement at age 66.

At that point wife can collect $800 under hers and an additional $300 under her DH's benefits.  Which would be half of his $2200.

WIfe is smart to collect early.  This works well when one wage earner made more than the other throughout the years.

---

I was totally something totally different about collecting on DH's SS they only way I could of collected would be.

is if he was decreased

I started to collect SSDI at 62 I am not able to work so it basically coincided with my 62nd birthday

[RealtyGal2]

Every year, starting at age 62, you get a little bit less deducted from the amount you would receive at age 66 or 67 (whatever is your elegibility year).  If you start collecting at age 62, you will stay at that amount plus whatever cost of living increases are approved by the government.  The difference betweeen collecting at 62 and waiting could be as much as $500 per month. Every year you wait to collect, after age 62, you will collect a little more per month.  Social security has a formula for calculating your benefit.  If you call them they will let you know what your options are.

[151949]

I totally understand the whole taking it at 62 thing esp. if you can afford to get that lower amount. HOWEVER - the fact is that MOST retirees need the higher amount each month. 25% is an awful lot of money - if you get $2000 at full retirement age - you will only get $1500 if you start taking it at 62. Considering inflation and all - I would not personally want to be losing $500/month going forward.You are basically going to get the same amount forever going forward - COLA raises being what they are.Besides the more you get from SS the less you  need to take from your savings, so the savings will last longer.

[gidgetgh]

---

@151949 wrote:

I totally understand the whole taking it at 62 thing esp. if you can afford to get that lower amount. HOWEVER - the fact is that MOST retirees need the higher amount each month. 25% is an awful lot of money - if you get $2000 at full retirement age - you will only get $1500 if you start taking it at 62. Considering inflation and all - I would not personally want to be losing $500/month going forward.You are basically going to get the same amount forever going forward - COLA raises being what they are.Besides the more you get from SS the less you  need to take from your savings, so the savings will last longer.

---

@151949- I understand what you're saying, but again, you'd be waiting to draw that higher amount for YEARS and those years of payments add up.  Using the example I've given a few times, you'd be missing out on $36,000+ in income over the first three years.  Takes a long time to make that up.  Someone else mentioned that it would take into your mid-80's to recoup the money.  Something to think about.

Again, personal circumstances and choice and everyone should do what works for them.  I don't think there's an exact right or wrong answer here.   Many people work full time beyond 62 so of course, they take it later and that's great.  I'm not working anymore and want my payment now.

[WenGirl42]

---

@gidgetgh wrote:

---

@151949 wrote:

I totally understand the whole taking it at 62 thing esp. if you can afford to get that lower amount. HOWEVER - the fact is that MOST retirees need the higher amount each month. 25% is an awful lot of money - if you get $2000 at full retirement age - you will only get $1500 if you start taking it at 62. Considering inflation and all - I would not personally want to be losing $500/month going forward.You are basically going to get the same amount forever going forward - COLA raises being what they are.Besides the more you get from SS the less you  need to take from your savings, so the savings will last longer.

---

@151949- I understand what you're saying, but again, you'd be waiting to draw that higher amount for YEARS and those years of payments add up.  Using the example I've given a few times, you'd be missing out on $36,000+ in income over the first three years.  Takes a long time to make that up.  Someone else mentioned that it would take into your mid-80's to recoup the money.  Something to think about.

Again, personal circumstances and choice and everyone should do what works for them.  I don't think there's an exact right or wrong answer here.   Many people work full time beyond 62 so of course, they take it later and that's great.  I'm not working anymore and want my payment now.

---

@gidgetgh Using @151949's numbers, the retiree would forego $54,000 by deferring payment for 3 years (1500/mo x 36 mos). They will break even 108 months, or 9 years, after they begin collecting at 65 (54,000 / 500 per mo).  The greater the difference in payment, the higher the amount lost in the 3 years between 62 and 65, but the faster the break-even point is reached. This person will reach it at 74. In your $1,000 vs 1,250 example, it would take until the person is 77 to break even.

You're totally right that everyone's situation is different, and we don't know what the future holds! Enjoy your higher monthly income

Edited to correct my break-even age math.

[151949]

In todays world many are going to live well into their 90's. Every year the value of your money shrinks. I want & need to get the highest possible amount monthly to live on.

[steiny3844]

I am so relieved that John and I decided to take SS as soon as we were eligible. John passed away 17 days before his 71st birthday. After being in the Marines and working almost 40 years, he would have received very little of what he put into the system. You just never know what is going to happen.

[Stray]

---

@Shelbelle wrote:

 Anyone that waits till 70 really cleans up!! 70 is max benefit to be gotten.

---

@Shelbelle- that's exactly what I did!  I loved my job and they wanted me to remain longer but the commute was getting to me....I still do consulting...so it worked out well for me. 

[gidgetgh]

---

@WenGirl42 wrote:

---

@gidgetgh wrote:

---

@151949 wrote:

I totally understand the whole taking it at 62 thing esp. if you can afford to get that lower amount. HOWEVER - the fact is that MOST retirees need the higher amount each month. 25% is an awful lot of money - if you get $2000 at full retirement age - you will only get $1500 if you start taking it at 62. Considering inflation and all - I would not personally want to be losing $500/month going forward.You are basically going to get the same amount forever going forward - COLA raises being what they are.Besides the more you get from SS the less you  need to take from your savings, so the savings will last longer.

---

@151949- I understand what you're saying, but again, you'd be waiting to draw that higher amount for YEARS and those years of payments add up.  Using the example I've given a few times, you'd be missing out on $36,000+ in income over the first three years.  Takes a long time to make that up.  Someone else mentioned that it would take into your mid-80's to recoup the money.  Something to think about.

Again, personal circumstances and choice and everyone should do what works for them.  I don't think there's an exact right or wrong answer here.   Many people work full time beyond 62 so of course, they take it later and that's great.  I'm not working anymore and want my payment now.

---

@gidgetgh Using @151949's numbers, the retiree would forego $54,000 by deferring payment for 3 years (1500/mo x 36 mos). They will break even 108 months, or 9 years, after they begin collecting at 65 (54,000 / 500 per mo).  The greater the difference in payment, the higher the amount lost in the 3 years between 62 and 65, but the faster the break-even point is reached. This person will reach it at 71. In your $1,000 vs 1,250 example, it would take until the person is 74 to break even.

You're totally right that everyone's situation is different, and we don't know what the future holds! Enjoy your higher monthly income

---

Hey @WenGirl42- thanks for doing the math for me!

[WenGirl42]

---

@gidgetgh wrote:

---

@WenGirl42 wrote:

---

@gidgetgh wrote:

---

@151949 wrote:

I totally understand the whole taking it at 62 thing esp. if you can afford to get that lower amount. HOWEVER - the fact is that MOST retirees need the higher amount each month. 25% is an awful lot of money - if you get $2000 at full retirement age - you will only get $1500 if you start taking it at 62. Considering inflation and all - I would not personally want to be losing $500/month going forward.You are basically going to get the same amount forever going forward - COLA raises being what they are.Besides the more you get from SS the less you  need to take from your savings, so the savings will last longer.

---

@151949- I understand what you're saying, but again, you'd be waiting to draw that higher amount for YEARS and those years of payments add up.  Using the example I've given a few times, you'd be missing out on $36,000+ in income over the first three years.  Takes a long time to make that up.  Someone else mentioned that it would take into your mid-80's to recoup the money.  Something to think about.

Again, personal circumstances and choice and everyone should do what works for them.  I don't think there's an exact right or wrong answer here.   Many people work full time beyond 62 so of course, they take it later and that's great.  I'm not working anymore and want my payment now.

---

@gidgetgh Using @151949's numbers, the retiree would forego $54,000 by deferring payment for 3 years (1500/mo x 36 mos). They will break even 108 months, or 9 years, after they begin collecting at 65 (54,000 / 500 per mo).  The greater the difference in payment, the higher the amount lost in the 3 years between 62 and 65, but the faster the break-even point is reached. This person will reach it at 71. In your $1,000 vs 1,250 example, it would take until the person is 74 to break even.

You're totally right that everyone's situation is different, and we don't know what the future holds! Enjoy your higher monthly income

---

Hey @WenGirl42- thanks for doing the math for me!

---

@gidgetgh You're welcome! I think it is very helpful to demonstrate what you've been saying.  I did make a math error though, because I added the years to break even to the age of 62, and I should have added them to the age of 65!  A person who defers a payment of $1,500 at 62 to get a payment of $2,000 at 65 will break even at 74, and a person who defers a payment of $1,000 at 62 to get a payment of $1,250 at 65 will break even at 77.