Probably can't answer that question without violating the terms of this site.The question is (not a political question), can an elected official be re-elected if they make hard decisions in an effort to keep social security solvent?
Probably can't answer that question without violating the terms of this site.The question is (not a political question), can an elected official be re-elected if they make hard decisions in an effort to keep social security solvent?
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.
There is no additional 5 year requirement for Roth conversions after you reach 59.5 years old. Both earnings and the converted amount may be withdrawn without penalty. There are even a few "professionals" that get that wrong, but it is clear in the tax code.https://www.schwab.com/ira/roth-ira/withdrawal-rules
If you have been putting in for 10 years, I would think you'd be ok, as long as you don't touch the money you do conversions on today for 5 years. 10 years should be a good chunk of money.
If you might need the money you convert today within the next 5 years, then it sounds like the wrong path.
I think we all know people who retired not because they were ready either emotionally or financially but because they were compelled to do so due to declining health.Everybody has heard that the 2 things you can't avoid are death and taxes. Retirement adds a third health, taxes, and death. Sorry to be so blunt but health has derailed more retirement plans than anyone knows right before retirement or early in retirement. Before you set a date think about insurance and you and your family's health. Time and health are not on a retiree's side even with a lot of money or the best plan these 2 things can and do make or break retirement.
Very temporary windfall but doesn't impact social security shortfalls over the long haul.
https://fortune.com/2025/02/19/americans-died-covid-social-security/
Well done.While all of that may be true for people like Buffett, and certain other entrepreneurs who built big companies from the ground up, it doesn't hold true for most others.... At least if they're somewhat honest with themselves.
I worked for 45 years in the metals trades, counting my apprenticeship. I liked my job OK, but the hours were long, and got tougher as I got older. (Standing for 10 to 12 hours a day on a concrete floor 6 days a week, is highly overrated).
On the flip side of that, was the pay got substantially better as my knees and feet got worse at tolerating it. By the time I hit 62, I had more than enough. The job went from being challenging, as my knowledge of it grew. Into just how much of a royal pain it would be to get it done. Because as always is the case in business, time is money.
The one thing I was always grateful for, were my mothers constant, never ending words, to ALWAYS be cautious about spending hard earned money.
Because of listening to her, (along with seeing examples of people around me who didn't), the happiest day of my life was on December 21st, 2014, when they helped me load my tool boxes into the back of my truck, never to return again.
The last 10 years have been blissfully satisfying. Because they were all mine. I never had to sell a single hour of them to someone else.
People like Buffett are outliers in the big scheme of things.Maybe this might provide some supplemental information to your retirement critical thinking:
Reasons someone might choose not to retire include: a strong sense of purpose and fulfillment in their current job, enjoying the social interaction with colleagues, wanting to maximize their Social Security benefits by delaying claiming them, financial concerns that might not be met in retirement, a desire to continue learning and growing professionally, and not feeling ready to give up the structure and routine of work; essentially, if someone feels their life is richer and more meaningful by continuing to work, they might choose to delay retirement.
I sense Warren Buffett accredits retirement significantly different than you.
View attachment 263087
Not sure I concur with that. We all have different things that motivate and drive us to do things. Some genetic, some from life experiences, sometimes outside influences, sometimes drawing the "short straw" (medical). I understand why many on this thread chose to retire. I also understand why so many chose to produce rather than receive. It is a personal choice, with no wrong or right path.People like Buffett are outliers in the big scheme of things.
The social security payout is continually updated based on actuarial tables. When you retire - you have an internal payout number based on your inputs, and then its divided out based on the number of months your expected to live from that point on. As people live longer, they payout simply gets spread out over a longer period. The system wasn't broken because people live longer. It had other inherent flaws.The Social Security Retirement age is way to young now. The average person now lives 10 to 15 or 20 years longer than when the program was developed. It's simple math.
This has always been true - social security is progressive. Meaning the more you put in, the less comparatively you get back out.cheat them by not giving them back on the scale of the same formula they give but ...
Sure. It depends on demographics, and who your benefiting and who your slighting. They were able to raise full ss age from 65 to 67 in 1983. They made it effective for people born after 1960. So as you can see, anyone under the age of 23 was disenfranchised. Not many people under 23 can legally vote, and very few that can do. Easy peasy.The question is (not a political question), can an elected official be re-elected if they make hard decisions in an effort to keep social security solvent?
Interesting assessment of how the age was raised. Thanks for posting, something I never connected the dots on.Sure. It depends on demographics, and who your benefiting and who your slighting. They were able to raise full ss age from 65 to 67 in 1983. They made it effective for people born after 1960. So as you can see, anyone under the age of 23 was disenfranchised. Not many people under 23 can legally vote, and very few that can do. Easy peasy.
Curious, please explain. What is "produce rather than receive"?Not sure I concur with that. We all have different things that motivate and drive us to do things. Some genetic, some from life experiences, sometimes outside influences, sometimes drawing the "short straw" (medical). I understand why many on this thread chose to retire. I also understand why so many chose to produce rather than receive. It is a personal choice, with no wrong or right path.
Its a required high school course in South Carolina and it doesn't help much I don't think. When your 16 or whatever you don't think that far ahead. 30 is old. Retirement isn't even a word you understand.Teach people how to count. Start personal finance in grade school.
I know of a couple of highly educated young people with good Silicon Valley jobs.
They drive drop dead gorgeous Mercedes but cannot afford rent or buy a property.
But at least give kids a fighting chance. Perhaps it will kick in before Social Security becomes their retirement plan.Its a required high school course in South Carolina and it doesn't help much I don't think. When your 16 or whatever you don't think that far ahead. 30 is old. Retirement isn't even a word you understand.
I am not against the class at all. My point is I don't think its going to help you much.But at least give kids a fighting chance. Perhaps it will kick in before Social Security becomes their retirement plan.
No one taught me about money; homelessness did. That can be a great teacher but there need to be alternatives.
I have a personal goal of changing the future of some of the young people in my family that have zilch for financial guidance. Worse than I had...I am not against the class at all. My point is I don't think its going to help you much.
Curious, please explain. What is "produce rather than receive"?
I call Mr Buffett an outlier because he has so much wealth he can do whatever he wants. He is waaaaay past the 1% bracket.