How one can earn a fortune with Social Security at 62

[Cellblock2429]

5 Reasons Taking Social Security at 67 Might Be a No-Brainer | The Motley Fool

There are a number of obvious and under-the-radar advantages of filing for benefits at age 67.

www.fool.com

Everyone says you'll make more money if you retire at the max age, 67.

Unless you know for certain you'll die young.

/----/ At 62, I ran the numbers and discovered that it would take 11 years of the higher 67 payments just to break even. My wife and I took our SS at 62 and used the $4,000 a month to invest and pay down debt. BTW, if you wait till 67, you miss out on the inflation increases along the way. Take it at 62 and get your initial payments back faster.

 

[Cellblock2429]

THE IOUs are in the trillions. Hopefully we'll at least get a can of coffee a month

ALL politicans are to blame for this shit. Ain't partisan one bit

/----/ democrats for pushing the agenda, and republican RINOs for going along to get along.

 

[Hang on Sloopy]

/----/ democrats for pushing the agenda, and republican RINOs for going along to get along.

I swear to God I think RINOs are secret agents of the DNC. They recruited early to play conservative and get elected and do the bidding. Vote repub on a do nothing bill, but libturd on anything major.

One would say one hell of a conspiracy theory correct? But would you put it past the DNC to concoct a long term plan like that.....FUCK NO!!!!!!!!!

They'd sell their moms livers on the black market for power

 

[debbiedowner]

Reasons to take SS early

You might be dead by full retirement age

A dollar today will be worth 80 cents in 5 yrs....................Under current inflation it will be about 35 cents after 5 yrs

You can still work and make 30k a yr I believe. You will lose 50 cents in benes for for each dollar over that. You aren't losing money though. It will be recalculated and you will have a higher monthly amount at full retirement for that money you temporarily had to repay

I told my client Matilda the above and then told her this

1191 at 62 or 1701 at 67........... If you make it to 67 that is. .....1701 will be worth about 1350, when compared to 5 yrs earlier. So you are losing about 150 bucks a month when you look at reality


Matilda. Let's say you take that 1191 and put in a mutual fund each month for 5 yrs. a quality S-P indexed fund

We will use an average of 8% return over many yr


The total time and amount of money is 60 months@ 8% return at 1191 each month

71,460 total principal

88,627 at 67

321,557 at 75

559,350 at 80

1,422,124 at 90

Matilda will be well off in 8yrs..................Really wealthy at 80...........................Doing back flips at 90

This will assure you you will not run out of money by outliving it

After I picked up Matilda off the floor after she fainted, she chose 62


This should be taught to high school seniors instead of figuring out what their genitals are not for and spitting on the flag, and shootin up skewls

The Social Security earnings limit is $1,580 per month or $18,960 per year in 2021 for someone age 65 or younger. If you earn more than this amount, you can expect to have $1 withheld from your Social Security benefit for every $2 earned above the limit. It's going up to $19,000 and some change next year.

 

[Hang on Sloopy]

The Social Security earnings limit is $1,580 per month or $18,960 per year in 2021 for someone age 65 or younger. If you earn more than this amount, you can expect to have $1 withheld from your Social Security benefit for every $2 earned above the limit. It's going up to $19,000 and some change next year.

Thank You. I thought it was 1 dollar for every dollar

Damned you taught me...................lololol...................Thanks

for the money you temporarily give back will be recalculated at 67 for a higher benefit

Lol.you stinker you

 

[Colin norris]

Reasons to take SS early

You might be dead by full retirement age

A dollar today will be worth 80 cents in 5 yrs....................Under current inflation it will be about 35 cents after 5 yrs

You can still work and make 30k a yr I believe. You will lose 50 cents in benes for for each dollar over that. You aren't losing money though. It will be recalculated and you will have a higher monthly amount at full retirement for that money you temporarily had to repay

I told my client Matilda the above and then told her this

1191 at 62 or 1701 at 67........... If you make it to 67 that is. .....1701 will be worth about 1350, when compared to 5 yrs earlier. So you are losing about 150 bucks a month when you look at reality


Matilda. Let's say you take that 1191 and put in a mutual fund each month for 5 yrs. a quality S-P indexed fund

We will use an average of 8% return over many yr


The total time and amount of money is 60 months@ 8% return at 1191 each month

71,460 total principal

88,627 at 67

321,557 at 75

559,350 at 80

1,422,124 at 90

Matilda will be well off in 8yrs..................Really wealthy at 80...........................Doing back flips at 90

This will assure you you will not run out of money by outliving it

After I picked up Matilda off the floor after she fainted, she chose 62


This should be taught to high school seniors instead of figuring out what their genitals are not for and spitting on the flag, and shootin up skewls

Is that under the assumption SS doesn't rise?

 

[Hang on Sloopy]

Is that under the assumption SS doesn't rise?

There are no variables. 8%......1191 a month. 60 months only. Whatever variables which would only be an increase in benefits,Cost of living etc The numbers are higher which is great..Thanks for bringing it up

 

[DudleySmith]

All those 'IOU's' are from other programs that use SS revenues, not from SS itself, a Fun Fact the Right keeps from admitting, because they like the interstates SS paid for and all the pork that goes to their states, like Ron Paul's favorites pork subsidies for his district and of Course Newt Gingrich's massive flood of Federal cash into his, and so on. They don't like it being pointed out who owes all those IOU's to the SS fund.

 

[Natural Citizen]

All those 'IOU's' are from other programs that use SS revenues, not from SS itself, a Fun Fact the Right keeps from admitting, because they like the interstates SS paid for and all the pork that goes to their states, like Ron Paul's favorites pork subsidies for his district and of Course Newt Gingrich's massive flood of Federal cash into his, and so on. They don't like it being pointed out who owes all those IOU's to the SS fund.

The Federal budget has aways been out of control and about as transparent as a brick wall. Ron Paul wanted the funds returned to the constituents in his state where it belonged before the feds could blow it all or redistribute it on dumb shit. There was nothing about it that could be demed ''pork."

They should have never got rid of earmarks. The oly reason Obama and company lobbied to get rid of them is for the simple fact that they didn't want any transparency with regard to what they were doing with the wealth grab. In fact every single dollar of the federal budget should be earmarked. It's the only real way to know where all the theft is being redistributed by the feds.

And don't even get me started on the SS discussion. The real national debt is in the hundreds of trillions of dollars if we wanna get real.

 

[DudleySmith]

The Social Security earnings limit is $1,580 per month or $18,960 per year in 2021 for someone age 65 or younger. If you earn more than this amount, you can expect to have $1 withheld from your Social Security benefit for every $2 earned above the limit. It's going up to $19,000 and some change next year.

Depending on the work, SS recipients can earn a lot more than that by forming an S corporation and paying themselves through that as W-2 earnings and keep the surplus for later distribution and remain under the cap. Consult a pro of course, as always, when setting up such schemes. Some employers don't like fooling with stuff like that, others are used to it.

 

[Roadrunner76]

im 64 and holding out as long as possible. If SS is your only income, then you better work as long as possible because the cost of living is only going higher than SS cost of living adjustments. I know a lot of people that took it at 62 and are now crying the blues. The only way it could work is if you own a home with cheap taxes OR you live in a subsidized apt.
As of 2020, You can earn about 17,500$ up to your Full Retirement Age without a penalty. What ever you earn over 17,5k, they take 1 for every 2 dollars earned.

 

[jwoodie]

The most sensible rule is to delay taking Social Security unless you need it, turn 70 or have a shortened life expectancy.

 

[Concerned American]

im 64 and holding out as long as possible. If SS is your only income, then you better work as long as possible because the cost of living is only going higher than SS cost of living adjustments. I know a lot of people that took it at 62 and are now crying the blues. The only way it could work is if you own a home with cheap taxes OR you live in a subsidized apt.
As of 2020, You can earn about 17,500$ up to your Full Retirement Age without a penalty. What ever you earn over 17,5k, they take 1 for every 2 dollars earned.

You hit the nail on the head. If SS is your only income--keep working. If you have no debt and a back-up pension and a spouse pension, I recommend going at 62. I did and things are working really well---so far.

 

[Cellblock2429]

The most sensible rule is to delay taking Social Security unless you need it, turn 70 or have a shortened life expectancy.

/------/ I ran the numbers and took SS at 62 1/2. My late wife did the same. It was nearly $4,000 a month combined or $48k a year before taxes. If we would have waited until 70, it would have taken 11 years to recoup that amount even at the higher rate. Sady, I lost my wife at 70, and following your advice, she would not have recouped one red cent of all the money she paid in after 35 years as a teacher.

 

[jwoodie]

/------/ I ran the numbers and took SS at 62 1/2. My late wife did the same. It was nearly $4,000 a month combined or $48k a year before taxes. If we would have waited until 70, it would have taken 11 years to recoup that amount even at the higher rate. Sady, I lost my wife at 70, and following your advice, she would not have recouped one red cent of all the money she paid in after 35 years as a teacher.

I'm sorry to hear that, but are you financially better off now than if you had waited?

 

[Cellblock2429]

I'm sorry to hear that, but are you financially better off now than if you had waited?

/----/ Thank you. Yes, we were better off. Part of the $4k a month went into the stock market with dividend-paying stocks that grew in size and value, part went to pay off some debt, take some vacations, and such. Those 90 months from 62 1/2 to 70 brought in $360,000 total into our household.

 

[jwoodie]

/----/ Thank you. Yes, we were better off. Part of the $4k a month went into the stock market with dividend-paying stocks that grew in size and value, part went to pay off some debt, take some vacations, and such. Those 90 months from 62 1/2 to 70 brought in $360,000 total into our household.

Although your wife's life was tragically cut short, you would now be receiving about 50% higher SS benefits if you had waited until you were 70. I am not criticizing your choices, but "early" SS retirement is not necessarily the best plan for everyone.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Although your wife's life was tragically cut short, you would now be receiving about 50% higher SS benefits if you had waited until you were 70. I am not criticizing your choices, but "early" SS retirement is not necessarily the best plan for everyone.

/——-/ At 50% more it would take 11 years to break even. I ran the numbers and took the payments as soon as I could. The big fly in the ointment is if you die before 70 your estate or spouse gets nothing. We wanted the money to use right away.

 

[Concerned American]

/------/ I ran the numbers and took SS at 62 1/2. My late wife did the same. It was nearly $4,000 a month combined or $48k a year before taxes. If we would have waited until 70, it would have taken 11 years to recoup that amount even at the higher rate. Sady, I lost my wife at 70, and following your advice, she would not have recouped one red cent of all the money she paid in after 35 years as a teacher.

Sorry for your loss. My wife taught school as well, but teachers do not pay into SS in the district where my wife taught. She went at 60 and I went at 62 as well.

 

[WinterBorn]

I ran the numbers as soon as the SS people sent them to me. I will make more, overall, by waiting until I am 67 years old only if I live to be 80. If I die before then I will have earned more by taking my social security at 62. I took it at 62. My 401k will pay me more anyway.