Rehashing the age 70 thing. Tell Dear Dickie what is it that he doesn’t get about SS at age 70?
I realize I am on the outside looking in, out of sync, ignoring “expert” advice and rehashing the subject, but I can’t help it. I need help here.
I simply cannot understand why anyone living off their investments would use those investments to live on in favor of delaying social security until age 70.
It seems to me that unless there is a gigantic pool of money they’ll never need, they are taking an unnecessary risk using more of their investments sooner rather than later. I think they call it opportunity cost. I used three AI apps and they all had the usual arguments for and against delaying to age 70. They were consistent about taking benefits when you need the money to live on and cautioned about using other assets just to delay.
Yes, I get some of it. A higher monthly SS benefit and with it a possible higher spousal survivor benefit. But part of the value there is the age difference between spouses. Assume age 70 is achieved, the life expectancy for males: is approximately 14 to 15 years. for females: approximately 16 to 17 years. Unless there is a significant younger age difference for a surviving spouse, there is not much time for the higher benefit to be needed - statistically. And you can provide for survivors in other ways.
Is a retirement plan going to succeed or fail based on the higher monthly Social Security benefit starting at age 70? Is that more important than accumulated assets and sustaining, if not growing them, for an extra three years or so? What if the person wants to retire earlier than FRA, is the extended period using more investments before age 70 still valid?
I read these words on Open Social Security “The strategy that maximizes the total dollars you can be expected to receive over your lifetimes is as follows:” Sometimes it is age 70, sometimes not, but I say “so what?”
Why would that be my goal? Besides, that advice does not even consider a persons total financial picture - investments, annuities, a pension.
I’m ready for the 🔻 just show me the real value of the trade off using unsecured money now for the possibility of higher monthly income several years in the future.
I simply cannot understand why anyone living off their investments would use those investments to live on in favor of delaying social security until age 70.
It seems to me that unless there is a gigantic pool of money they’ll never need, they are taking an unnecessary risk using more of their investments sooner rather than later. I think they call it opportunity cost. I used three AI apps and they all had the usual arguments for and against delaying to age 70. They were consistent about taking benefits when you need the money to live on and cautioned about using other assets just to delay.
Yes, I get some of it. A higher monthly SS benefit and with it a possible higher spousal survivor benefit. But part of the value there is the age difference between spouses. Assume age 70 is achieved, the life expectancy for males: is approximately 14 to 15 years. for females: approximately 16 to 17 years. Unless there is a significant younger age difference for a surviving spouse, there is not much time for the higher benefit to be needed - statistically. And you can provide for survivors in other ways.
Is a retirement plan going to succeed or fail based on the higher monthly Social Security benefit starting at age 70? Is that more important than accumulated assets and sustaining, if not growing them, for an extra three years or so? What if the person wants to retire earlier than FRA, is the extended period using more investments before age 70 still valid?
I read these words on Open Social Security “The strategy that maximizes the total dollars you can be expected to receive over your lifetimes is as follows:” Sometimes it is age 70, sometimes not, but I say “so what?”
Why would that be my goal? Besides, that advice does not even consider a persons total financial picture - investments, annuities, a pension.
I’m ready for the 🔻 just show me the real value of the trade off using unsecured money now for the possibility of higher monthly income several years in the future.
The post Rehashing the age 70 thing. Tell Dear Dickie what is it that he doesn’t get about SS at age 70? appeared first on HumbleDollar.
No comments have been added yet.
