US Social Security @ 62 or?

[Jeffr2]

1 hour ago, cmarshall said:

 

Not correct.   At her Full Retirement Age the wife gets the larger of her own benefits from her earnings or the spousal benefit of 50% of the husband's benefit.  For a family total of 150%.  Then when he dies, she loses her spousal benefit, but gets 100% of the husband's benefit.

https://money.cnn.com/retirement/guide/retirementliving_socialsecurity.moneymag/index2.htm

 

If you have already reached full retirement age (somewhere between 65 and 67 based on your date of birth; if you aren't sure, check your latest Social Security annual statement), you're entitled to 100% of your deceased spouse's benefit.

[Jeffr2]

1 hour ago, kynikoi said:

 

All government statistics invalid. You think Blackrock, Goldman, Berkshire Hathaway trust and rely on government stats? Inflation in US is running well above 5%. You don't have the velocity of money among other anomalies.

Inflation is FAR from 5% currently

[HuskerDo]

On 4/7/2021 at 9:18 AM, BTempleman said:

A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. 

If by "bird" you mean your "one-eye" and by "bush" you mean a beautiful woman's sweet spot I would question the value of your equation.

[HuskerDo]

On 4/8/2021 at 8:51 AM, sirineou said:

The cost of living (COLA) for 2020    1.3 and it is projected to be the same for 2021 but who knows , Mine went up $20.60  LOL,   big woopty do!!

The projections for 2021 you refer to are months old and prices have indeed gone up faster than the "experts' predicted in the US. 

 

Jan Producer Prices up 1.3%

Feb Producer Prices up 0.5%

March Producer Prices up 1.0% (which is up 4.2% year over year)

 

 

[HuskerDo]

23 hours ago, kynikoi said:

It's not actually inflation adjusted. It's certainly not inflation adjusted in real terms.

Last year the rate of inflation was 1.2%. Our SS payments increased 1.2%. Case closed.

[HuskerDo]

6 hours ago, cmarshall said:

 

Ridiculous.  US Bureau of Labor Statistics gives a the 12-month change through Feb. 2021 as 1.7%.  

 

https://www.bls.gov/cpi/

 

But maybe your methodology is superior to that used by the BLS? 

Common sense tells a person the inflation they are feeling in their lives and in what they buy. If you can't remember what a loaf of bread  or a set of new tires for your car or a gallon of milk or a box of cereal cost you last year you need to write it down each year. ANYONE's methodology is better that the BLS as they include things in their calculation that a lot of folks don't buy. Inflation is a person by person and family by family equation. 

 

"US Bureau of Labor Statistics gives a the 12-month change through Feb. 2021 as 1.7%"..... until they makes their adjustments. Producer prices have gone up 1.3%. 0.5% and 1.0% the first three months of this year. The year over year increase for March compared to one year ago is 4.2%. 

[ChrisP24]

22 hours ago, HuskerDo said:

I was standing outside of the SS office 2 hours before they opened the day after my 62nd b-day. I walked away from the working world at age 59 and lived off my savings for over 2 years. One of the best decisions I ever made. However, after I started collecting SS I felt a tad guilty when I went to the bank or grocery store and saw people in their 30's/40's that had decades to go before they could stop working. I decided I had paid my dues especially after working nearly 50 years(yes, I was working at age 9 as a paperboy and rarely was without a job until I walked away from it all) . 

 

I can relate to feeling a bit guilty in that circumstance, but then I see those same people driving expensive new German luxury cars, and imagine what sort of over-leveraged lifestyle they might be living.   It's a choice, and we all have a degree of freedom and often more control than we realize with regard to learning how to manage debt, save and invest, and make lifestyle choices that balance money and possessions with time to enjoy life and indulge in interests independent of the rat race.    I was a paperboy at age 11, and a busboy in a restaurant within weeks of turning 16 and legally able to work for a regular paycheck.  Worked through high school and college, sometimes two jobs.  Even after college starting out as a professional at a Monday-Friday 9-5, I still moonlighted at my old college job delivering pizzas because by then working a 55-hour-plus week including weekends had become the way I was geared.   Was in the military reserve for 20+ years where my annual "vacations" were spent doing two weeks of annual training with my unit, plus a weekend each month, sometimes two per month to complete various military schools. 

 

I kept that up until one year when my annual salary from my full-time job increased by as much as I could make in an entire year moonlighting - - then I realized that I was working as hard as I could, and that any additional effort was better spent working smarter.   So I finally gave up the college job and used the time to start a different sort of "moonlighting" taking graduate school courses in the evenings to open up doors in my professional career.   It still felt strange and brought some pangs of guilt to have some weekends off, just as it feels a bit strange now to be retired a few years early.

 

After thinking of all those things, then I don't feel guilty.   I don't have anything that those people haven't had the same opportunity to choose.   

Edited April 9, 2021 by ChrisP24

[ChrisP24]

20 hours ago, flexomike said:

Hey that's a case of beer

 Don't knock it back knock it.....

[Yellowtail]

You have to live a good long while (I would have been almost 80)  to break even if waiting until 65, unless perhaps your income is such that it will be heavily taxed on your Social Security...

 

If you have a child, the child also draws until they are eighteen. When I included what my kid draws, I would have to be almost 90 to break even.

 

If you start drawing at 62, you also have the advantage of keeping money you might otherwise spend invested. If you have to draw down on your 401k or traditional IRA, that money is taxable. 

 

Finally, given the leftward shift of the country, means testing could be right around the corner, so if you've been saving your whole life, you may no longer qualify.

 

Make hay while the Son shines...

[Yellowtail]

6 hours ago, HuskerDo said:

Common sense tells a person the inflation they are feeling in their lives and in what they buy. If you can't remember what a loaf of bread  or a set of new tires for your car or a gallon of milk or a box of cereal cost you last year you need to write it down each year. ANYONE's methodology is better that the BLS as they include things in their calculation that a lot of folks don't buy. Inflation is a person by person and family by family equation. 

 

"US Bureau of Labor Statistics gives a the 12-month change through Feb. 2021 as 1.7%"..... until they makes their adjustments. Producer prices have gone up 1.3%. 0.5% and 1.0% the first three months of this year. The year over year increase for March compared to one year ago is 4.2%. 

 

But inflation calculations based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI) DO NOT include food and energy, things most everyone DOES buy. It the price of gasoline, electricity, or milk doubles, it has no direct effect on the CPI or inflation. 

 

$1,000 invested in an index fund at 62, will likely be worth a lot more than a $1,000 Social Security payment at 65 that has been adjusted for inflation...

[kynikoi]

22 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

the leftward shift of the country, means testing could be right around the corner,

I do think about this. Often, they'll change programs more for incoming. Therefore, would be a benefit to claim as early as possible.

 

But again, I don't see cuts. Too many rely on SS and especially will in future as primary income. A huge amount of the nation is currently on the some and that will be permanent.

 

That's what helicopter money is for. That's why they are creating trillions of dollars out if thin air. That in turn debases the currency.

 

If all goods and services equal 100 but then they equal 200 the value of those goods and services has dropped by 50%.

 

Hence, the start of the run to metals even houses... tangible items.

 

I don't see waiting past 65 personally.

Edited April 9, 2021 by kynikoi

[Yellowtail]

1 hour ago, kynikoi said:

I do think about this. Often, they'll change programs more for incoming. Therefore, would be a benefit to claim as early as possible.

 

But again, I don't see cuts. Too many rely on SS and especially will in future as primary income. A huge amount of the nation is currently on the some and that will be permanent.

 

That's what helicopter money is for. That's why they are creating trillions of dollars out if thin air. That in turn debases the currency.

 

If all goods and services equal 100 but then they equal 200 the value of those goods and services has dropped by 50%.

 

Hence, the start of the run to metals even houses... tangible items.

 

I don't see waiting past 65 personally.

 

No cuts to those that have burned through everything they earned, but means testing will cut benefits to those that have saved...

[cmarshall]

7 hours ago, HuskerDo said:

Common sense tells a person the inflation they are feeling in their lives and in what they buy. If you can't remember what a loaf of bread  or a set of new tires for your car or a gallon of milk or a box of cereal cost you last year you need to write it down each year. ANYONE's methodology is better that the BLS as they include things in their calculation that a lot of folks don't buy. Inflation is a person by person and family by family equation. 

 

"US Bureau of Labor Statistics gives a the 12-month change through Feb. 2021 as 1.7%"..... until they makes their adjustments. Producer prices have gone up 1.3%. 0.5% and 1.0% the first three months of this year. The year over year increase for March compared to one year ago is 4.2%. 

 

Your reply shows just how useless "common sense" is when considering inflation.  Three of the four items you cite are food items, just like every discussion here about inflation.  The reason you and other focus on food is because we all make lots of food buying decisions in a month, which is what psychologists call "recency bias."  Our household expenditure on groceries last month was 7.07% of our total budget.  So, for us, food would have to spike up by 14% or so before it added 1% to our household cost of living.   Your food expenses are probably similar.  So, groceries are not a source of inflation.

 

Our biggest monthly cost, and probably yours, too, is housing, which was 28.31% of our budget last month.  But in a normal month we don't make any spending decisions about housing at all, so the "common sense" crowd don't pay attention to it.  Housing is currently in deflation here in Bangkok and in New York City, our old home.  We pay less rent now for a much bigger and better apartment than we did when we arrived in Bangkok ten years ago.  Our rent this year will be 7.8% less than last year.

 

Also, we know that the US BLS inflation statistics are correct, because they agree with the MIT Billion Price Index, which is independent and uses a different methodology.  So, yes, you should pay attention to the US BLS statistics and believe them.

[kynikoi]

This is just as arbitrary New York? Until covid NOVEL virus hit it's been 20-40 years since NYC has seen any downward pressure on housing.

 

Thai prices aren't down, they just are not up. Stagnant and market is quite opaque.

 

Pricing for housing outside large metros is skyrocketing.

 

2 minutes ago, cmarshall said:

Housing is currently in deflation here in Bangkok and in New York City, our old home.

 

[Yellowtail]

3 minutes ago, cmarshall said:

 

Your reply shows just how useless "common sense" is when considering inflation.  Three of the four items you cite are food items, just like every discussion here about inflation.  The reason you and other focus on food is because we all make lots of food buying decisions in a month, which is what psychologists call "recency bias."  Our household expenditure on groceries last month was 7.07% of our total budget.  So, for us, food would have to spike up by 14% or so before it added 1% to our household cost of living.   Your food expenses are probably similar.  So, groceries are not a source of inflation.

 

Our biggest monthly cost, and probably yours, too, is housing, which was 28.31% of our budget last month.  But in a normal month we don't make any spending decisions about housing at all, so the "common sense" crowd don't pay attention to it.  Housing is currently in deflation here in Bangkok and in New York City, our old home.  We pay less rent now for a much bigger and better apartment than we did when we arrived in Bangkok ten years ago.  Our rent this year will be 7.8% less than last year.

 

Also, we know that the US BLS inflation statistics are correct, because they agree with the MIT Billion Price Index, which is independent and uses a different methodology.  So, yes, you should pay attention to the US BLS statistics and believe them.

 

Food, gasoline and electricity are much more significant to the working poor, and people that are dependent on Social Security as their only source of income. 

 

For a someone that is 70 and owns their home, food and energy are could be some of their largest expenditures. 

[cmarshall]

12 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

 

Food, gasoline and electricity are much more significant to the working poor, and people that are dependent on Social Security as their only source of income. 

 

For a someone that is 70 and owns their home, food and energy are could be some of their largest expenditures. 

 

Are you working poor?  Is anyone in this discussion working poor?

 

Average US household spend 5.9% of budget on groceries.  (https://www.thestreet.com/personal-finance/average-cost-of-food-14845479) 

 

Not much different from us.  Except maybe for the rich, housing is the biggest cost for nearly everyone in the US.  And that includes home owners without a mortgage who still have a significant "opportunity cost" of the capital tied up in the home.

 

That's why inflation at the BLS is calculated by economists.

Edited April 10, 2021 by cmarshall

[Yellowtail]

8 minutes ago, cmarshall said:

 

Are you working poor?  Is anyone in this discussion working poor?

 

Average US household spend 5.9% of budget on groceries.  (https://www.thestreet.com/personal-finance/average-cost-of-food-14845479) 

 

Not much different from us.  Except maybe for the rich, housing is the biggest cost for nearly everyone in the US.  And that includes home owners without a mortgage who still have a significant "opportunity cost" of the capital tied up in the home.

 

That's why inflation at the BLS is calculated by economists.

 

I am not opposed to the method of calculation, I am only pointing out that real inflation is much higher for the working poor and many Social Security recipients. 

 

The average household income in the US was about  $98K a year in 2020. So $98K(5.9%/12 months) ~ $482/month for groceries. 

 

$482 a month is significant to people getting $1,500 a month on Social Security. 

 

To be clear, people living on $1,500 a month are probably not spending $482 a month on groceries, but the are spending much more than 5.9% ($88.50). 

 

It is interesting that they use the average income, Assuming the 5.9% is correct, had they used the median income that jumps up to 8.5%.

 

 

 

 

[cmarshall]

40 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

 

I am not opposed to the method of calculation, I am only pointing out that real inflation is much higher for the working poor and many Social Security recipients. 

 

The average household income in the US was about  $98K a year in 2020. So $98K(5.9%/12 months) ~ $482/month for groceries. 

 

$482 a month is significant to people getting $1,500 a month on Social Security. 

 

To be clear, people living on $1,500 a month are probably not spending $482 a month on groceries, but the are spending much more than 5.9% ($88.50). 

 

It is interesting that they use the average income, Assuming the 5.9% is correct, had they used the median income that jumps up to 8.5%.

 

Well, yes, it sucks to be poor, but the discussion is about inflation which at least potentially affects everyone, not just the poor.  Inflation may be worse for the poor, but that doesn't invalidate the calculation since most people are not poor.

 

Nevertheless, I am glad to hear of your concern for the poor.  Can I assume that you support the Biden Administration's plan to raise the lowest level of SS retirement benefit from 75% of the federal poverty level to 125%?

[BobinBKK]

On 4/7/2021 at 7:54 AM, LomSak27 said:

You're concerned about possible inflation & monetary issues that are personally important to you but others consider not realistically relevant. 

 

BTW I'm filing for SS next week. Yep. That is why I looked in. However as I worked os for a long time,  I will qualify with over 40 credits but little more. its going to be nothing except beer & pizza money for me. As such I will get the beer & pizzas started at 62. No reason not to. 

 

I would not think debasement of the dollar that relevant or realistic as such if you are trying to maximize, yes wait until later to take your payments at sixty five.  

I'm taking mine at 62 but be prepared for OEIO to take a long time to process your application. I applied on November 6th 2020 and I'm still waiting...

[cmarshall]

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

The average household income in the US was about  $98K a year in 2020. So $98K(5.9%/12 months) ~ $482/month for groceries. 

 

Average household income is not relevant by the way.  Median household income is $65,712 per the Census Bureau.

 

https://www.census.gov/library/visualizations/interactive/2019-median-household-income.html

[JimGant]

Geez, are the folks on this forum still living in the States? If not, why all the discussion on inflation? Sure, if the cost of living in Thailand increased by, say, 3% -- then, yeah, I'd like my SS COLA to increase by 3%. But, actually, in the larger scheme of things, I really wouldn't care -- because the only "inflation" I care about -- and that really matters -- is the appreciation of the baht against the dollar. And only if inflation in the US galloped ahead of that in Thailand would forex be affected -- and not appreciably, since increasing interest rates would counterbalance. Anyway, exchange rates, not inflation, should be our main concern.

[Berkshire]

3 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

It is interesting that they use the average income, Assuming the 5.9% is correct, had they used the median income that jumps up to 8.5%.

 

I just read an article recently that argues using "average income/net worth" in the US is grossly misleading.  The super rich billionaire types really distort the numbers.  The median figure is a much better measurement and the median income/net worth in America is significantly less than the average.  Which suggests that income/wealth inequality in the US is quite severe.

[EVENKEEL]

Pretty funny, but some live life by the seat of their pants while others plan everything. Unless you need to keep working and I know guys in this situation where retirement isn't in their vocabulary. If the money at 62 is enough to live? And in Thailand it's plenty, then as long as you have your health ins sorted out then can live nicely here in Thailand for 40K bht/mo. or less.

 

Pull the trigger and collect money at 62.

[gamb00ler]

1 hour ago, JimGant said:

Geez, are the folks on this forum still living in the States? If not, why all the discussion on inflation? Sure, if the cost of living in Thailand increased by, say, 3% -- then, yeah, I'd like my SS COLA to increase by 3%. But, actually, in the larger scheme of things, I really wouldn't care -- because the only "inflation" I care about -- and that really matters -- is the appreciation of the baht against the dollar. And only if inflation in the US galloped ahead of that in Thailand would forex be affected -- and not appreciably, since increasing interest rates would counterbalance. Anyway, exchange rates, not inflation, should be our main concern.

My wife and I have moved about 40% of our unencumbered capital to invest in Thailand.  Now we're almost ambivalent to Thai/US currency fluctuations.  I look at the rate infrequently out of curiosity.  I have not converted our SSA retirement to a lump sum value to include in the calculation of our currency fluctuation exposure.  That would probably have a significant impact on our exchange rate risk.

Edited April 10, 2021 by gamb00ler
spelin

[cmarshall]

54 minutes ago, gamb00ler said:

My wife and I have moved about 40% of our unencumbered capital to invest in Thailand.  Now we're almost ambivalent to Thai/US currency fluctuations.  I look at the rate infrequently out of curiosity.  I have not converted our SSA retirement to a lump sum value to include in the calculation of our currency fluctuation exposure.  That would probably have a significant impact on our exchange rate risk.

 

Well, you have partly solved the exchange risk problem, but now you have taken on a new problem: the risk of alienation from your assets.  Thai Immigration may at any time deny the extension of your stay in Thailand, but then you have to request permission from the Bank of Thailand to transfer your assets out of the country.  I have no idea how likely it is that they might refuse, but that is not a risk that I would be willing to take.  

[Yellowtail]

6 hours ago, cmarshall said:

 

Well, yes, it sucks to be poor, but the discussion is about inflation which at least potentially affects everyone, not just the poor.  Inflation may be worse for the poor, but that doesn't invalidate the calculation since most people are not poor.

 

Nevertheless, I am glad to hear of your concern for the poor.  Can I assume that you support the Biden Administration's plan to raise the lowest level of SS retirement benefit from 75% of the federal poverty level to 125%?

 

I told you I am not opposed to the method of calculation, please try to follow along. 

 

You can assume what you like, but I think Social Security should be eliminated, not expanded. 

[Yellowtail]

5 hours ago, cmarshall said:

Average household income is not relevant by the way.  Median household income is $65,712 per the Census Bureau.

 

You claimed: Average US household spend 5.9% of budget on groceries.

 

I responded with:

The average household income in the US was about  $98K a year in 2020. So $98K(5.9%/12 months) ~ $482/month for groceries. 

 

$482 a month is significant to people getting $1,500 a month on Social Security. 

 

To be clear, people living on $1,500 a month are probably not spending $482 a month on groceries, but the are spending much more than 5.9% ($88.50). 

 

It is interesting that they use the average income, Assuming the 5.9% is correct, had they used the median income that jumps up to 8.5%.

 

I was pointing out that (apparently) your source intentionally used average to make the percentage look smaller. Now you are claiming average income is not relevant, after using average income in your post.

 

[Yellowtail]

4 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

Pretty funny, but some live life by the seat of their pants while others plan everything. Unless you need to keep working and I know guys in this situation where retirement isn't in their vocabulary. If the money at 62 is enough to live? And in Thailand it's plenty, then as long as you have your health ins sorted out then can live nicely here in Thailand for 40K bht/mo. or less.

 

Pull the trigger and collect money at 62.

 

Actually, I think the more financially secure you are, more more sense drawing as soon as you can makes. If Social Security was going to be my only source of income, I would have held out as long as I could to maximize my payment. 

[Yellowtail]

4 hours ago, Berkshire said:

I just read an article recently that argues using "average income/net worth" in the US is grossly misleading.  The super rich billionaire types really distort the numbers.  The median figure is a much better measurement and the median income/net worth in America is significantly less than the average.  Which suggests that income/wealth inequality in the US is quite severe.

 

Yes, the median households earn only about 70% of what average households earn. That gap will widen ad the left loves the super-rich and has nothing but contempt for the middle-class. 

[cmarshall]

3 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

 

I told you I am not opposed to the method of calculation, please try to follow along. 

 

You can assume what you like, but I think Social Security should be eliminated, not expanded. 

 

So, let's bring back poverty levels for the elderly from the 1930's?  Because you are so concerned about the poor?