Video on not taking social security at age 65

GON

GON

$150 Site Donor 2025
Joined
Nov 28, 2014
Messages
9,809
Location
White Sands, NM
Watched two well-produced videos that recommended not taking social security at age 65 (or earlier such as age 62). The author of the first video is a medicare consultant- he sells no products or services related to social security.

The first video's author recommendation to wait till full retirement age made clear sense to me. When I read the comments, almost every comment was for taking social security at age 62. I know life happens, and people can die at age 64, 66, and on and on. But I was still surprised how many comments from the video were in support of taking social security at age 62.

The second video had eight very understandable reasons to take social security at 62, and eight reasons to wait to 67 or older to take social security.

I found these videos worth watching- maybe you will also.

The reason for the research is my Wife is 62, and I 60. She received a letter from SSA offering her to collect social security now. I plan on working full time until at least age 70-- so no reason I can see to take social security in my situation until age 70.


 
Last edited:
I like what Dave Ramsey says:
"Knowing when to take SS is knowing when you're going to die".

Everyone's situation is different. The money you leave on the table from 62-full retirement age is in the 6 figures...providing you're not working. You must be careful of how much money you make.
Can you afford to leave 6 figures on the table? Then you must hope that by not taking SS until full retirement age, that you can also live well into your 80's in order to break even.
 
Last edited:
Best summary I've seen said if you are going to need the SS to live on in retirement work as long as you can to make your SS checks as big as possible. If your main retirement funds come from other sources take SS as soon as you can to maximize the number of checks you draw. People can and do die early and none of SS passes on to benefit your family. If my math is correct regardless of when you start drawing you are ahead until you pass age 77-78.
 
I retired (on a full service pension) at age 49 and started taking SS at 62. As a two time cancer survivor, I don't regret my decision at all. I should note that the amount I qualified (worked) for and the amount I received was substantially different because of WEP. I always had a second job that paid SS but because I had a pension they cut my SS by nearly half. Allegedly, I'm due to get the full amount and back pay for just over a year. But I haven't seen it and am not holding my breath.
 
The issue is that the Social Security Administration uses actuarial tables, so that overall it's the same amount (roughly speaking) no matter when you take it, but men don't live as long as women, and some people just want to tell their boss to go to hell and have for years, some are not in good shape at 62 or face structural discrimination in the workplace.

You can make an argument however you want I guess. My Dad took it at 70, but then at 71 he had a major heart attack and they told him the blockages were so bad that his body had actually grown arteries to route around some of it. I didn't know that was a thing.

He collapsed while mowing the yard.

It did not end up being the one that got him, and he's 73 now, but geez that was close, right?

If he had taken it at age 62, he'd have been drawing those checks for 11 years now, not 3. The rate he's going, 62 might have been the better deal.

His wife is so frail that she can't see because of age and a botched LASIK in the 90s. She trips and falls over things at night and goes to the hospital because they're too cheap to leave a lightbulb on. They felt it was a good idea to go to Florida on an airplane in December and they came down with COVID while they were down there.

Then you have my doctor, who is in his late 80s and he's got his right mind and he's spry and he took his at 70, so growing the checks made sense because it wasn't risking drawing one check and then falling over with the lawnmower.

Then there's other considerations.

With smaller Social Security checks, you may get housing vouchers, food stamps, LIHEAP, the Medicare Savings Program, and subsidized internet and phone service. If you wait to draw it, your checks might be too large. So by taking at 62 you might make a lot more money, in fact. Also, taking at 62, you won't be taxed as heavily. If Social Security would be your only significant income, you may want to look and see if smaller checks would mean more money. Who cares if the rest come from other programs?

One problem is that if you work and you're under FRA, Social Security can suspend your check, but the cool thing is, when you stop working, they'll start the check again and adjust it upwards to account for the months you didn't get checks.
 
Last edited:
This is a tricky situation for me. I'm in a situation where I will most likely outlive my wife. Both men and women are long lived in my family. My wife is a type 1 diabetic and I will probably outlive her. I will retire at 57 with a pension and have the option for the survivor benefit.
 
Well, do the math. The oods are that one will never truely catch up if SS is not taken early. SS system is changing. Im taken mine and convinced a good friend that was going to wait until until 70 to take another look at it, and do the math. Guess what he just retired at 65. Im 62 and taking it now as I deserve something before I go. I am still going to work and pump as much as I still can into a roth. IRA.
 
billt460 said:
Same here. I've known too many people who died at 63-67. If you take it at 65 instead of 62, that is a LOT of money you have to make up.... And you're betting you are going to live long enough to be able to do it. Many don't.
Click to expand...
We all have different situations.

Prior to watching both videos, I also thought drawing at 62 years of age was the safest and best action.

One item in the video that caught my eye was the "35-year rule" Social security is based on a earners top 35 years. In my case, I expect for the next ten years will be the highest earning years of my life. If I started collecting at age 62, my final eight years of "high earning" would not be eligible for the calculation. For some, that is a significant factor to calculate in the decision-making process.

Next is average life expectancy. U.S. average life expectancy is calculated from birth to death. The calculation for death measurably rises for U.S. residents that reach age 62.

If you are collecting social security- no reason to watch the two videos except for informational purposes. If one is not yet collecting social security, I think spending a total of 45 +/- minutes watching both videos may be worth six figures to you (depending on ones current financial situation and future retirement plans).

Finally, we all are well aware that the U.S. has a mountain of debt/ deficit. The Social Security trust funds have been borrowed (spent) and the social security fund has an IOU in place of actual funds. So, a modification of social security entitlements seems more likely than not in the coming years. The future solvency of social security was not part of the decision-making process of either video.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
What is the significance of SS full retirement age?
6 7 8
Replies
150
Views
7K
Dave Hess
A
Life Expectancy in the USA, Formula - you calculate from your present age, not your birth age.
4 5 6
Replies
113
Views
8K
javacontour
slo town
You can check out but you can never leave
2
Replies
35
Views
3K
wpod
doitmyself
Brain Cramp - Start SS while working tax implications?
Replies
9
Views
943
doitmyself
A
My Journey Begins, Cancer and Medicare, Maybe this will help some others one day
10 11 12
Replies
232
Views
7K
alarmguy
Back
Top Bottom