|
Author
|
Topic: Oh shit I've done it now
|
Aznative
FARTS ON CLUELESS LIBERALS
Member # 506
|
posted May 15, 2015 07:15 AM
One more thing: I have to repay the three SS checks my wife has received.
--------------------
Never thought the devil would need a teleprompter but I could be wrong.
United State of America: RIP
Born July 4th 1776 died November 6th 2012
Posts: 1924 | From: Phoenix Az | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted May 15, 2015 08:15 AM
I'm not really giving advice. I'm just pointing out that betting on a larger benefit amount at age 70 is a cruel joke for those that do not live that long. My motto is live for today. It might be all you have.
Rod, we were married 44 years and they were all good, I treasure the memories.
Good hunting. El Bee
edit: didn't see the above 'til I posted. But, that's true no matter if it's three months or three years. You just have to repay the amount you received.
I'm just thinking...suppose you repay$ three years you collected age 62 to age 65.... then die. See? You never know the hand you are dealt.
[ May 15, 2015, 08:18 AM: Message edited by: Leonard ]
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 31462 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Aznative
FARTS ON CLUELESS LIBERALS
Member # 506
|
posted May 15, 2015 12:26 PM
It is a very personal decision and difficult decision. I just thru out all that information so other members can see the possibilities.
--------------------
Never thought the devil would need a teleprompter but I could be wrong.
United State of America: RIP
Born July 4th 1776 died November 6th 2012
Posts: 1924 | From: Phoenix Az | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kokopelli
SENIOR DISCOUNT & Dispenser of Sage Advice
Member # 633
|
posted May 15, 2015 02:03 PM
And I'm reading it very carefully. Thanx !!
A lot of variables to consider, not the least of which is some lying rat-bastard that comes along and says "If you like your health insurance.............."
Yeah, I was one of the 6.5 million that lost their health care because of the Magic Muslim.
--------------------
And lo, the Light of the Trump shown upon the Darkness and the Darkness could not comprehend it.
Posts: 7580 | From: Under a wandering star | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted May 15, 2015 04:40 PM
The reason, koko, is that repaying what they sent you and going back to work can make considerable difference, when you finally refile. Same thing though.
If you repay $12,000 X 3 years equals $36,000. So, if it involves ages from 62 to 65, and then you start drawing again; well, the amount you get could be 500/600 a month more, so you had better plan on living another ten years to make a dent in the total. I dunno?
To me, I fail to see how it would work, unless you then get that huge inheritance, and I would guess that Lotto winnings and that sort of thing wouldn't be counted as social security earnings, but I don't know if that's true?
Whatever it is, you are stuck wif it forever! And, I could be full of shit?
Good hunting. El Bee
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 31462 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Aznative
FARTS ON CLUELESS LIBERALS
Member # 506
|
posted May 16, 2015 04:36 AM
FYI: I need to make a correction on a piece of information you have given out Leonard. People were withdrawing their SS at 62 and repaying it back at 66. They were intentionally using it as an interest free loan so the government put a stop to it. You now have only one year to cancel it and you can only do it once.
--------------------
Never thought the devil would need a teleprompter but I could be wrong.
United State of America: RIP
Born July 4th 1776 died November 6th 2012
Posts: 1924 | From: Phoenix Az | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted May 16, 2015 05:34 AM
As I said; I could be full of shit.
No, really. I'm not even close to current on that stuff, nobody should put trust in what I have to say about social security benefits.
Ask me something I know about.
Good hunting. El Bee
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 31462 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Aznative
FARTS ON CLUELESS LIBERALS
Member # 506
|
posted May 16, 2015 09:10 AM
I'm in the middle of it all right now so I'm learning everything I can. Good information is hard to come by when the SS employees don't even know the rules.
One web site socialsecuritysolutions.com gave me some bad information free of charge. They want you to pay for a plan that they will develop for you so I believe they purposely give bad free information to help confuse you all in an effort to get you to pay for a personalized plan.
--------------------
Never thought the devil would need a teleprompter but I could be wrong.
United State of America: RIP
Born July 4th 1776 died November 6th 2012
Posts: 1924 | From: Phoenix Az | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Az-Hunter
Hi, I'm Vic WELCOME TO THE U.S. Free baloney sandwiches here
Member # 17
|
posted May 16, 2015 11:07 AM
This guy is guy is pretty sharp on his subject, I read his column every sunday. This sums it up pretty well.
Have aging baby boomers turned into greedy geezers? Or are they just being wise and prudent with their Social Security benefits. I'm talking about a trend I've discussed many times in this column: Recent and near-term retirees are gaming the Social Security system (some might call it gambling) to squeeze every last nickel out of their Social Security benefits.
They are primarily employing two specific strategies to maximize their Social Security payout. One, generally called file and suspend, allows a 66-year-old retiree to apply for Social Security retirement benefits, but then immediately suspend those payments, usually so that a lower-earning spouse can claim benefits on his or her record. So the lower-earning spouse gets up to half of the retiree's rate, even while the retiree's benefits are in suspense. At 70, the retiree "unsuspends" benefits and gets his or her full retirement rate plus a 32 percent bonus.
The other strategy, known as the restricted application rule, allows a 66-year-old higher-earning potential retiree to claim 50 percent of a lower-earning spouse's Social Security until age 70, at which point the retiree would switch to his or her own benefits -- and they would come with the aforementioned 32 percent bonus.
I have written a fact sheet that explains these strategies in more detail. If you want a free electronic copy, send me an email at thomas.margenau@comcast.net. (This is the same fact sheet I've offered several times before in this column. So if you've sent for and received the fact sheet in the past, it's the same version as the one I'm still offering today. There is no need to ask for another copy.)
The good news about my fact sheet is that it is free. The bad news is that to find out if and how these strategies could work for you, you would have to get out your calculator and run the numbers yourself.
But there are a growing number of businesses that will provide you with software programs or other services for a fee to help you make the calculations. I don't want to mention or endorse any of these outfits, but a simple Google search using key words like "maximize Social Security" should lead you to any number of these enterprises.
Or better yet, you can check out a recent Wall Street Journal story headlined ""Financing your future: how to maximize your Social Security benefits." WSJ tested and rated five of these maximizing services. They used a fictional couple: Bob and Wendy, both of whom are turning 66 and both of whom are eligible for their own retirement benefits. Bob's monthly rate is $2,182 and Wendy will get $815. They assumed that both Bob and Wendy would live until age 85.
The Journal reports that using the five different programs, and the various maximizing strategies suggested by each, Bob and Wendy would get projected Social Security benefits over the next 19 years (age 66 to 85) of anywhere between $763,222 to $773,500. The WSJ article obviously goes into much more detail than I am providing here.
But one thing the Wall Street Journal didn't do is factor in a sixth scenario: no maximizing strategy at all. In other words, they didn't tell you what Bob and Wendy would have received had Bob simply filed for retirement benefits at age 66, and Wendy filed for a combination of her own retirement and spousal benefits at the same age. And the answer to that question is $746,244.
I am making this point to stress that these maximizing strategies aren't really going to make you rich. To be sure, assuming you live to a ripe old age, you will end up netting maybe $20,000 or $30,000 more over two decades than you would had you simply filed for Social Security benefits in the regular manner. But you have to ask yourself if that extra money is worth the risk.
And the risk is this: "Are you going to live until that ripe old age?" For example, in several of the strategies suggested by the Social Security maximizing services, Bob would file and suspend and thus not get any Social Security benefits until age 70. In other words, he is essentially throwing away $2,182 per month for four years gambling that he will live until his mid 80s to beat the system. And if he has a heart attack and dies at age 69, what then? Well, then Bob would have lost the Social Security gamble.
As I've reported before in the column, throughout my 40-year career of working on Social Security issues, both as an employee of the Social Security Administration and now as a columnist, I have met or communicated with thousands of widows who told me that their husband delayed benefits (usually until age 70) because he expected to live until his 90s. But then he died in his early 70s and each widow usually told me something like this: "Gosh, I wish he would have retired earlier so we would have had a chance to enjoy our retirement together."
And in that same 40-year career, I have never once run into an 85 year old who came up to me and shouted with joy: "I did it! I lived long enough to beat the system!" I'm not saying those folks aren't out there. Of course, they are. But I am saying that once they reach that age, they might not be jumping up and down with excitement at having won the Social Security game.
Just something to think about as you consider gaming the Social Security system by employing your own maximizing strategies.
If you have a Social Security question, Tom Margenau has the answer. Contact him at thomas.margenau@comcast.net. To find out more about Tom Margenau and to read past columns and see features from other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.
(c)COPYRIGHT 2013
Posts: 1627 | From: 5 miles west of Tim | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted May 16, 2015 03:06 PM
I think the above article coincides pretty much with what I wrote earlier. Especially the part about ASSUMING you are going to live long enough to gain all that extra dough.
I applied at 62, (actually well before my birthday) figuring I would at least get some back. I think the whole "carrot and stick" option that SS promotes is kinda of a shell game. Oh yeah, you wait 4-5 more years and you get a lot more! Well, the longevity might be inching up but people drop dead every day.
Take my cousin Mike, who died about two months ago, maybe three? He was 69, shooting for that 70 age retirement and virtually died at the wheel, just like his dad, (swear to god!) in the bank's parking lot! Yeah, that's quite an incentive!
Fact is, all it's good for is as a SUPPLEMENT. You better have something else going for you. Man, I drive around Yucca valley, doing the yard sales routine and there are a lot of retirees up here, and a few trailer parks, which I consider to be just a little short of Purgatory. I asked a lady just today, what her space rent was, $505 a month. To me that seems like exorbitant, but what do I know? Hey, you get a clubhouse!
Everybody looks back and if they are honest, they think; "I could have planned this shit a little better". Or, in my case, a lot better, but there are no "Do Overs" in this category.
Good hunting. El Bee
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 31462 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cdog911
"There are some ideas so absurd only an intellectual could believe them."--George Orwell.
Member # 7
|
posted May 17, 2015 11:44 AM
You guys really have me thinking. I'm 50, be eligible to retire from USPS in 5.5 years. The way this job is tearing me up, I really wonder if I could stick it out past 60 y/o, if I even make it to 56 walking the street. I could put in for a supervisor job, but letter carrier is one job they haven't been able to replace with a robot yet. At the same time, there isn't much else out there for me to even look at right now. $65/yr in this part of the country is good money when it comes with pension and benefits - two things my kids will likely never have to include in their job search strategies. My supervisor was, like, "if you retire at 56, you'll reduce your benefits by 34%", and my reply was, "If I push it any further, I won't be physically able to enjoy my retirement anyway, trading quantity of life for quality. There comes a point where you wonder if you can realistically expect both. My dad guarded his retirement and lived like he was poor. His wife dies and there goes all his future plans. Two years later, he was dead, too. Carpe diem sounds like a good backup.
--------------------
I am only one. But still, I am one. I cannot do everything, but still, I can do something; and, because I cannot do everything, I will not refuse to do something that I can do.
Posts: 5438 | From: The gun-lovin', gun-friendly wild, wild west | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
DanS
Scorched Earth (AZ Sector)
Member # 316
|
posted May 17, 2015 01:19 PM
I am only a few years older than you Lance. If I go next year at 55, I loose 36% of my pension. I plan on retiring at 60 and loosing 6% of my pension. Don't have a clue about Social Security, or if it will even be around or means tested and taken away from me by time I am 62 or such..
--------------------
futuaris nisi irrisus ridebis
Saepe Expertus, Semper Fidelis, Fratres Aeterni:
Often Tested, Always Faithful. Brothers Forever!
Posts: 1465 | From: flyover country | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted May 18, 2015 06:36 AM
Lance, the couple across the street both retired from postal service, thirty years. (I think?) They both got another part time job right away, for healthcare. I don't know what their situation is but they both drive Jags. Must be something to it? A lot of people think any government job is gravy train.
Good hunting. El Bee
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 31462 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
booger
TOO BIG TO FAIL
Member # 3602
|
posted May 18, 2015 07:42 AM
Interesting stuff here. I have my 54th birthday coming up on June 6th…just realized with this thread I am only 8 years away from being able to draw SS…pretty humbling. My wife and I are the same age, and we both work for the same company. We just had a discussion this weekend about what to do when we hit 62. The monthly difference in SS from 62 to 67 is about $700 a month for me, it seems like it is worth the wait for me until I hit 67—I don’t really want to pay back any benefits while I am working. I definitely will not wait until 70.
I do not plan on working at my present job past 67…I certainly think I will have my fill of 13 more years of lending money—43 years of dealing with customers day after day will be enough for this kid. May look at a different career path at that point—I always wanted to be a teacher, and am looking in to an associate instructorship in finance at the local community college.
Lance, I feel for you. I have a cousin that just retired as a mail carrier at 65…he has had both knees replaced and is waiting on a hip right now. Listening to him and now you, I just did not realize how hard walking that distance every day played on your body.
--------------------
If we ever forget we are one Nation Under God, then we will be a nation gone under--Ronald Reagan
Posts: 911 | From: Bob Dole Country | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cdog911
"There are some ideas so absurd only an intellectual could believe them."--George Orwell.
Member # 7
|
posted May 18, 2015 06:22 PM
It's bad enough that I'm presently keeping my eyes open for a career change. I've watched two different carriers retire this year and both because of medical reasons - wear and tear. I can try to stick it out but am truly concerned that I am only doing irreparable damage to my body and I've seen too many older people lose the ability to get around and end up dying of pneumonia or heart disease because of it. One of the retirees went out on a workman's comp injury and the PO sent him all over to different doctors. The one that finally did seven different surgeries on him told him that half of his practice is contract for the postal service and the other half is college football players. Same types of injuries, except that the college kids heal between injuries. We don't, if at all. The PO wants an all-clear ASAP so they can throw you back into the grinder. I swear that they actually hope you die on the route so they don't have to pay out all your benefits.
--------------------
I am only one. But still, I am one. I cannot do everything, but still, I can do something; and, because I cannot do everything, I will not refuse to do something that I can do.
Posts: 5438 | From: The gun-lovin', gun-friendly wild, wild west | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kokopelli
SENIOR DISCOUNT & Dispenser of Sage Advice
Member # 633
|
posted May 19, 2015 04:40 AM
Which brings us back full circle to something that you posted earlier; quality / quantity of life.
Retire as soon as possible and live on minimum coin or keep working until you can afford your own handicap cart at Wally World.
Tough choices.
--------------------
And lo, the Light of the Trump shown upon the Darkness and the Darkness could not comprehend it.
Posts: 7580 | From: Under a wandering star | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted May 19, 2015 07:11 AM
All I can say is; get out as soon as you can!
My sister lost her alimony, had to go back to work, from which she could foresee no relief or retirement and she was right, died at the switch.
Myself, I wonder about a job so rich and fulfilling that you cannot see yourself getting away from the steady checks?
One thing my tax man told me when I was young; PAY YOURSELF FIRST ! But, it was not always convenient. In fact, I pretty much ignored that advice, many times.
I have had some great jobs and a few that sucked. There is no way of knowing, until you make the plunge.
As I have mentioned before, Higgins always said, "I will never retire." Well, okay. I admit, working for yourself has an attraction and (at the same time) huge responsibilities. To me, it seems wretched. I ain't cut out to die at the switch.
Good hunting. El Bee
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 31462 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Aznative
FARTS ON CLUELESS LIBERALS
Member # 506
|
posted May 21, 2015 06:35 AM
Good Post Az-Hunter. The above postal workers raise a good point. Construction workers, Laborers, Mechanics, Postal Carriers, etc shouldn't be working past 62. What good is retirement if you are a cripple and cannot enjoy it. I found working on concrete to be very hard on the hip, knees and ankles.
Getting back to those financial advisers whose advice made the most sense, well they gave me some very bad advice. The sticking point is a person cannot suspend social security benefits before age 66. So the strategy for my wife to collect almost as much in spousal benefits vs her own benefits doesn't work until I reach age 66. We won't be transferring our IRAs over to them. We spent half a day fixing their screw up.
I think I said this earlier: Try to find someone who really understands SS.
The wife and I have talked about starting my SS earlier than 70, and we will if we feel we really need it. The earliest I will consider it will be age 65. I just don't need it right now.
--------------------
Never thought the devil would need a teleprompter but I could be wrong.
United State of America: RIP
Born July 4th 1776 died November 6th 2012
Posts: 1924 | From: Phoenix Az | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted May 21, 2015 12:04 PM
Well, you could always get it, and bank it.
On the premise that if they award benefits to illegals, they would be doing much to bankrupt the system anyway. So, go ahead and wait....but then again, I don't understand social security. lol
Good hunting. El Bee
[ May 21, 2015, 12:07 PM: Message edited by: Leonard ]
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 31462 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
