Taking Social Security

etowncatfan

New member
Jan 3, 2003
15,479
459
0
At 62 or later??? The wife and I both have 401K income. Looking to retire around the age 62. Live off 401K and wait later for Social Security? Or take Social Security now and not take much out of your 401K? I know each person is different. Just wondering what everybody"s thoughts were or experiences if you are already retired.
 

UKserialkiller

New member
Dec 13, 2009
34,297
35,841
0
At 62 or later??? The wife and I both have 401K income. Looking to retire around the age 62. Live off 401K and wait later for Social Security? Or take Social Security now and not take much out of your 401K? I know each person is different. Just wondering what everybody"s thoughts were or experiences if you are already retired.


If you and your wife are making $401K in income, why do you need to worry about taking social security at 62?

Is it drugs?
 

Dig Dirkler

New member
Nov 20, 2015
2,963
825
0
<--- anxiously awaiting noted financial/economics guru craziepx90's astute take on this topic
...
 

ndk_rivals308474

New member
Feb 8, 2004
115
67
0
If you don't need the money today for living expenses, you could take it early and invest it for later. Depending on the amount(s) of your benefit, it's possible the growth could outpace the benefit increase.

Bonus reason to take it early and invest - what's left of the money can be left to your family when you pass.
 
  • Like
Reactions: etowncatfan

DSmith21

New member
Mar 27, 2012
8,297
2,036
0
Every year that you wait to take SS earns you about 8% more in monthly benefit. In most cases, you would be better off living off your 401k and taking SS as late as possible. The exception would be if one of you were in bad health and didn't expect to live into your 70s and 80s. Also you and your wife both get a SS payment. So one of you could collect while the other waits several years and lets their payment grow.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: etowncatfan
May 2, 2004
167,859
1,740
0
<--- anxiously awaiting noted financial/economics guru craziepx90's astute take on this topic
...
Tough decision.

I think a lot of it depends on what the 401k balance is and what the funds are allocated to. Hopefully the funds aren't in high exposure investments this close to their retirement, so theoretically it's growth is going to be nominal between the age of 62 and 65.
 
  • Like
Reactions: etowncatfan

GhostVol

New member
Oct 25, 2007
37,469
4,832
0
Depends on family history. My mom died at 56 (complications from diabetes). My dad died at 75 (complications from 3 strokes, an aneurysm , and a bad heart.) His last 5 years were him being pretty much non-functional. He was the longest living male in my family. I lost the lottery and inherited both their issues...so I'm taking my SS at 62 since I'm now 55...IF I make it to 62. My little brother got lucky in genetics, and has no health issues, plus a job he likes. So he'll probably wait as long as possible before he takes his SS. My sister is already on disability at 59. Everybody is different. If you DON'T need the SS, wait.
 
  • Like
Reactions: etowncatfan

Deeeefense

Well-known member
Staff member
Aug 22, 2001
43,644
4,675
113
In a nut shell, in order to determine where you maximize your return, assuming you don't need the money immediately, you have to make an honest assessment of how long you expect to live.. If you are in good health and don't have any symptoms of the degenerative diseases chances are you will make it well past 80 and beyond, in which case you want to wait until age 70 and get the max payment. If you have health issues and think you may be headed for the exits a lot earlier then take the money as soon as you are eligible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: etowncatfan

dgtatu01

New member
Sep 21, 2005
8,673
506
0
This is extremely dependant on your personal circumstances. Lifestyle, savings, cost of living, health etc are all variables that vary widely from person to person and all play a big factor in this decision. You probably don't want to disclose you monthly budget, your retirement savings, and your health to the Paddock so I would go talk to a financial advisor.
 

Phantom

New member
Dec 7, 2005
6,335
2,023
0
As for me, I'm gonna take the "62" money and run with it. The way this country is heading, I don't even know if the ish will be there when I turn 66 or whatever.
 

UKserialkiller

New member
Dec 13, 2009
34,297
35,841
0
As for me, I'm gonna take the "62" money and run with it. The way this country is heading, I don't even know if the ish will be there when I turn 66 or whatever.

The Great Generation Wars. Gen X is going to have to kill off the Boomers just to see a penny. Gen X will build an alliance with Gen Y to ensure that we kill off those ***** Millennials, and squashing any future threat to our SS. Using that money to help raise the Millennials' kids so they take over when Gen X and Gen Y die off.
 

DSmith21

New member
Mar 27, 2012
8,297
2,036
0
The Great Generation Wars. Gen X is going to have to kill off the Boomers just to see a penny. Gen X will build an alliance with Gen Y to ensure that we kill off those ***** Millennials, and squashing any future threat to our SS. Using that money to help raise the Millennials' kids so they take over when Gen X and Gen Y die off.

Gen Y and millennials are the same generation. So maybe you want Gen X to forge an alliance with the few non-***** Millennials?
 
Last edited:

DSmith21

New member
Mar 27, 2012
8,297
2,036
0
Same generation? Well that obviously changes things. Anyone born after 1989 dies. Simple solution.

Agreed with one caveat. Any female that looks like these three millennials is safe. Can't throw out the babes with the bathwater.





 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Phantom