What is the significance of SS full retirement age?

The other piece of it is there's a SS cap. It's not outlandish, it's currently $168,600. There are likely many people who will draw the maximum, which again, is not earth shattering, I think it's in the $3,000s. Just googled it, $3,822.
There is a cap on what income you pay in against. Its also adjusted with inflation. It makes sense because there is a cap on how much you can collect, but there is discussion of eliminating the cap (and not eliminating the pay out cap).

Its also progressive. ie if you paid the max every year for 35 years, and I paid half the maximum for exactly the same time, my allocation would be much more than half of yours. ie its a type of social program - the less you pay the more you get comparatively.

Last and probably most important is SS is "on budget", meaning the federal gov collects the money, pays SS payments, and gives the excess to the SS trust fund. If there is a shortage the trust fund pays the government. The trust fund themselves figure they will be empty in a few years, at current estimates say they will be out by 2033 - at which time using current estimates they would have enough coming in to pay 79% of scheduled benefits. Of course planning on what will happen 9 years from now is a fools errand. https://www.ssa.gov/oact/trsum/
 
Some on here has their own personal "self worth" tied up in their employment. Therefore-they don't wish to retire.
Has anybody ever heard someone say on their death bad- "I wish I worked more"..................
And others live decades in extreme miserable jobs, years wasted while fantasizing about "idyllic" retirement. Pick your "poison". Send me your contact info and I'll put you on my death bed to-do list, lol.

1722475057522.jpeg

The moral of this six page thread is that it is unwise to judge others and paint with a broad paintbrush when everyone's unique situation should be taken into account.
 
Last edited:
I’m pretty sure I’d be getting something. I have at least 10 years of other full-time work, including five years of Federal Government work.
Sign up for a SS account.
Then you can see what you are getting.

There was a time in the late 80s when new hires were having both SS and TRS taken out.

As a side note, my GFather was an original member of TRS.
My GMother told me when he joined, she didn't know how they were going to get by without the nickel they were taking out of his check.
 
Last edited:
And others live decades in extreme miserable jobs, years wasted while fantasizing about "idyllic" retirement. Pick your "poison". Send me your contact info and I'll put you on my death bed to-do list, lol.

View attachment 233189
The moral of this six page thread is that it is unwise to judge others and paint with a broad paintbrush when everyone's unique situation should be taken into account.
In other words those who haven't planned properly for retirement.....
 
p.s. one thing I was trying to express, and am trying to figure out myself, is the time factor. There is absolutely a time that comes, when time > money.

Here's an exaggerated example. During the pandemic, people got an extra $600/week. PER WEEK, on unemployment. This made no sense. There were people who made more collecting unemployment, than they did at their jobs. I've never in my life been given $2,400/mo. extra, for nothing at all lol (my bro for example collected the regular max of $700+, and a $600 additional, so that's around $67k/yr on unemployment, more than an entry level person's wage). This permanently shaped the wfh mentality imho

So in the right sense, it could be that making less at 62, but having tons of time available, is more valuable than getting more after 67. That's an enigma for me, can't see what age that would be in my mind...financially I am thinking it might be good to earn a full salary at 62, 63, maybe 64? Especially since I have a young child...
 
Last edited:
Because it does...........
Over 40% of boomers have yet to save a dime. Its even worse for my generation.

Which means that when the trust fund is depleted in a few years, they will start means testing. So your savings will cost you likely.

 
Over 40% of boomers have yet to save a dime. Its even worse for my generation.

Which means that when the trust fund is depleted in a few years, they will start means testing. So your savings will cost you likely.

"Inadequate retirement savings isn’t just a “boomer issue.” If you are among the millions of Americans behind on retirement savings, just know that you aren’t alone. Increasing inflation rates have repeatedly moved the goalposts and caused many to feel behind on their goals to save for retirement."

Why did it "start" with boomers though? My parents set a good example.............I'm a late-ish boomer (1958). I blame..........well I can't say here, but mainly the "give it to me TV easy life. "
 
In other words those who haven't planned properly for retirement.....
No. Some plan for a retirement different than what you choose. Retirement planning goes beyond money (at least for me). It's a lifestyle, which if one planned well, is your choice, not that of other's. I'm an odd guy that has different values than most. My career resembles retirement lifestyle for decades.
 
"Inadequate retirement savings isn’t just a “boomer issue.” If you are among the millions of Americans behind on retirement savings, just know that you aren’t alone. Increasing inflation rates have repeatedly moved the goalposts and caused many to feel behind on their goals to save for retirement."

Why did it "start" with boomers though? My parents set a good example.............I'm a late-ish boomer (1958). I blame..........well I can't say here, but mainly the "give it to me TV easy life. "
It didn't start - its always been.

My parents generation saved some money, had no debts, and some had private pensions. They had much lower expectations of retirement - basically stay in their current home and take it easy.

Private pensions started to go away in the 80's. Congress approved 401K's in 1978 as a sort of replacement. So really boomers are the first generation to have meaningful access to that concept. As you can see, 57% took someone up on it, and the rest did not. There the next group to retire so there the ones of highest interest. Clearly if they haven't started yet there pretty close to out of time.

Gen X is worse, but the average GenX is 50. So in theory they still have time. You can't condemn them yet. Unlikely they will either, but you can't say for sure.

I know the older generation likes to blame the younger ones, and vice versa, but I have managed boomers, GenX, Milennials and raised 2 GenZ. I can tell you laziness is a trait that comes in all packages and doesn't discriminate by age one iota.
 
It didn't start - it’s always been.

My parents generation saved some money, had no debts, and some had private pensions. They had much lower expectations of retirement - basically stay in their current home and take it easy.

Private pensions started to go away in the 80's. Congress approved 401K's in 1978 as a sort of replacement. So really boomers are the first generation to have meaningful access to that concept. As you can see, 57% took someone up on it, and the rest did not. There the next group to retire so there the ones of highest interest. Clearly if they haven't started yet there pretty close to out of time.

Gen X is worse, but the average GenX is 50. So in theory they still have time. You can't condemn them yet. Unlikely they will either, but you can't say for sure.

I know the older generation likes to blame the younger ones, and vice versa, but I have managed boomers, GenX, Milennials and raised 2 GenZ. I can tell you laziness is a trait that comes in all packages and doesn't discriminate by age one iota.
Private pensions were never that commonplace. They were not part of every job. Even companies that had them, like Packard, sometimes ceased to exist and those pensioners lost everything. Yes, many of them got liquidated in the 1980s, but there weren’t that many in the decades prior.

The failure of planning for the future is as old as human civilization - Aesop’s fables, from over 2,000 years ago, included the story of the Ant and the Grasshopper, a well known story from well before the current era.
 
Private pensions were never that commonplace. They were not part of every job. Even companies that had them, like Packard, sometimes ceased to exist and those pensioners lost everything. Yes, many of them got liquidated in the 1980s, but there weren’t that many in the decades prior.

The failure of planning for the future is as old as human civilization - Aesop’s fables, from over 2,000 years ago, included the story of the Ant and the Grasshopper, a well known story from well before the current era.
Completely true, but Aesop's lessons seem to be even more forgotten as time moves on. My current employer has no 401K match but my last one did. I worked with people that wouldn't even put in enough to get the match. Can't fix stupid.

1722519308180.webp
 
I stopped working full time about 7 years before I applied for ss. I had my pension and 401's set up and working before I pulled the plug. I worked part time for those 7 years at a job where I was in a stock purchase plan. 4 years ago I started my no show job with the ss administration, and several other financial institutions. haven't regretted anything. Some people don't understand that SS is not supposed to be your only source of income at retirement. My sister for example didn't get that memo. 2 years ago her husband died, and she was able to claim his benefits. Even tho his money was a little bit more that what she was getting, she's still broke by the end of the month. And can barely keep her bills paid. She took her SS at 62, as did her husband. She gets whatever cost of living increases, but she's behind in the principle by taking it early. She has no pension or annuity, or stocks. Her health isn't the best , and can only go back to some form a super easy work, that doesn't require physical exertion. And as we all know, they don't pay any real money. Yea, there are a zillion reason why some can take SS early and live comfortably, or have to work until your ready to drop.,,
 
I often wonder if someone in their fifties is on SS disability what age do they Retire ? Is it their own choice ?
 
I often wonder if someone in their fifties is on SS disability what age do they Retire ? Is it their own choice ?
In my wife's case, at her full retirement age (66.5) they automatically removed her from SS disability and put her on "regular" SS, with no $$ change up or down. She started disability at age 57, about 10 years before FRA. Her current monthly SS is about 45% +/- of what she would have collected had it been possible to continue working. It will stay this way until one of us kicks over. Neither working nor contributing the past 10 years comes back to bite you in the rear end. Fortunately, we are very well set on our retirement planning and SS is simply added frosting on the cake (maybe do my midlife crises delayed, lol).

Other circumstances might differ.
 
Last edited:
FWIW - had an old boss - good guy. Hadn't worked for him in several years and found out he retired, so I gave him a call. He told me he was constantly busy - once retired everyone had a project or volunteer position they begged him to take.

Another friend of mine - taught me how to do my job more or less retired years ago. About a year later I visited him in Florida - same story - he was head of the golf league, head of some volunteer thing, had some HOA job.

Maybe they were just complaining - but neither were the type to complain when working. Or maybe they were just saying it to convince themselves they were keeping busy. Pretty much made up my mind after that I would keep working as long as I could - and as long as I enjoy it. Why work for free?
 
Last edited:
From AARP (a trusted source)

The survivor benefit is generally calculated on the benefit your late spouse was receiving from Social Security at the time of death (or was entitled to receive, based on age and earnings history, if he or she had not yet claimed benefits). The actual amount of your payment will differ according to your age and family circumstance:

As previously noted, if you have reached full retirement age, you get 100 percent of the benefit your spouse was (or would have been) collecting.
If you claim survivor benefits between age 60 and your full retirement age, you will receive between 71.5 percent and 99 percent of the deceased’s benefit. The percentage gets higher the older you are when you claim.
If you claim in your 50s as a disabled spouse, the survivor benefit is 71.5 percent of your late spouse's benefit.
If you apply on the basis of caring for a child who is under 16 or disabled, you can collect 75 percent of the late spouse’s benefit, regardless of your age.
Some might be confused, if you’re already getting social security and your spouse dies you will not collect two benefit checks.

It is untrue that you will collect your spouse checks in some magical way.

You will collect one check of whoever check is the higher amount, the other check will be discontinued.
 
Regarding retirement for those that are far away from it let’s remember one thing the massive amount of money that you feel you have your 401(k) is not real money. It’s unrealized gains until it is turned into cash.
If you are a decade or more away from retirement, you should keep in mind and hope that history repeats itself as it has been for the last 80+ years, but we are in uncharted territory now, and our economy is built on a house of cards, massive printing, money, and massive load unseen in the history of the USA.
All I’m saying is the money that you think you have in that 401(k) is not there. It’s simply an unrealized gain.
Having some investment money in real property or real gold isn’t a bad idea because it’s real, not paper
 
Last edited:
Back
Top