Thread Rating:

odiousgambit
odiousgambit
Joined: Nov 9, 2009
  • Threads: 275
  • Posts: 7369
June 12th, 2017 at 6:55:37 AM permalink
Quote: lilredrooster

instead of withdrawing 4% a year a person could easily find a conservative bond fund that would average about 4% per year ...



there are those who would argue, but in any case the more important point is that the 4% r.o.t. envisions increasing the percentage for inflation, so you begin at 4% withdrawal rate but you do not stay there .

P.S. just for the record I retired in 2013 and the 4% r.o.t. has worked pretty good. I have more in stocks than is recommended but stocks have done OK so that gamble has worked. I have 'tread water' as far as total liquidatable assets , which suggest they will go down later on. But the success of it has meant also I can hold off on SS till 70 in just about any likely scenario .
"Baccarat is a game whereby the croupier gathers in money with a flexible sculling oar, then rakes it home. If I could have borrowed his oar I would have stayed." .......... Mark Twain
billryan
billryan
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 69
  • Posts: 2511
June 12th, 2017 at 7:31:47 AM permalink
Quote: odiousgambit

there are those who would argue, but in any case the more important point is that the 4% r.o.t. envisions increasing the percentage for inflation, so you begin at 4% withdrawal rate but you do not stay there .

P.S. just for the record I retired in 2013 and the 4% r.o.t. has worked pretty good. I have more in stocks than is recommended but stocks have done OK so that gamble has worked. I have 'tread water' as far as total liquidatable assets , which suggest they will go down later on. But the success of it has meant also I can hold off on SS till 70 in just about any likely scenario .



How many years will it take getting SS at 70 to make up for what you would have had you started at 62 and invested the money?
It's what you do and not what you say If you're not part of the future then get out of the way
odiousgambit
odiousgambit
Joined: Nov 9, 2009
  • Threads: 275
  • Posts: 7369
June 12th, 2017 at 8:03:46 AM permalink
Quote: billryan

How many years will it take getting SS at 70 to make up for what you would have had you started at 62 and invested the money?



A matter of huge debate, controversial enough that SS will not help you to decide.

You really need to know when you are going to die! If you are a gambler, not broke, and healthy, I think you have to wait until your regular retirement age at least as a bet on it! Past that is *really* debatable - I think a chart helps show that. Notice the conversion of lines.



chart from https://www.fool.com/retirement/2017/04/08/is-it-smarter-to-claim-social-security-at-62-or-70.aspx
"Baccarat is a game whereby the croupier gathers in money with a flexible sculling oar, then rakes it home. If I could have borrowed his oar I would have stayed." .......... Mark Twain
TigerWu
TigerWu
Joined: May 23, 2016
  • Threads: 7
  • Posts: 590
June 12th, 2017 at 8:30:10 AM permalink
Unless my investments have done insanely well and I have more money than I know what to do with, I will be taking SS ASAP at 62. It's all based off of average life expectancy, anyway. My life expectancy is 80 as of right now, so if I die at 80 I will have gotten pretty much the exact same amount of money no matter when I start taking payments. Might as well take them as early as possible, even if I don't really need the money, so I can either reinvest it or take some awesome vacations.
lilredrooster
lilredrooster
Joined: May 8, 2015
  • Threads: 85
  • Posts: 912
June 12th, 2017 at 9:22:05 AM permalink
i saw a guy post elsewhere a very good non mathematical reason for deferring s.s. to age 70. it works best for a guy who for whatever reason is not considering his spouse or his heirs. his reasoning was this: if he delays to age 70 and lives well beyond 70 then he has some extra money for those years which is great. but what if he decided to defer to 70 but he didn't live to age 70? is he pissed off because he didn't get anything? no, he's not pissed off about anything. because he's dead.
everybody wants to go to heaven. but nobody wants to die.
odiousgambit
odiousgambit
Joined: Nov 9, 2009
  • Threads: 275
  • Posts: 7369
June 12th, 2017 at 10:55:59 AM permalink
Quote: lilredrooster

i saw a guy post elsewhere a very good non mathematical reason for deferring s.s. to age 70. it works best for a guy who for whatever reason is not considering his spouse or his heirs. his reasoning was this: if he delays to age 70 and lives well beyond 70 then he has some extra money for those years which is great. but what if he decided to defer to 70 but he didn't live to age 70? is he pissed off because he didn't get anything? no, he's not pissed off about anything. because he's dead.



this is my thinking pretty much - spouses are taken care of anyway tho I couldn't cite exactly how that works at the moment. I *have* boned up on spousal benefits while both are still alive, something every couple should do.
"Baccarat is a game whereby the croupier gathers in money with a flexible sculling oar, then rakes it home. If I could have borrowed his oar I would have stayed." .......... Mark Twain
Skeptic
Skeptic
Joined: Dec 9, 2015
  • Threads: 5
  • Posts: 169
June 12th, 2017 at 11:07:42 AM permalink
In a perfect world SS will be means-tested within the next 15-20 years. This kind of waste is bankrupting the country.

Nothing depresses me more than going to a casino on a random weekday and seeing seniors feeding their SS checks into the machines. I won't even go into the Beau Rivage in Biloxi for that reason. There are probably hundreds of them there right now.
lilredrooster
lilredrooster
Joined: May 8, 2015
  • Threads: 85
  • Posts: 912
June 12th, 2017 at 11:47:37 AM permalink
Quote: Skeptic

Nothing depresses me more than going to a casino on a random weekday and seeing seniors feeding their SS checks into the machines. I won't even go into the Beau Rivage in Biloxi for that reason. There are probably hundreds of them there right now.


i've thought exactly the same thing. but then i thought, if they weren't there where would they be? a lot of them would be alone in their houses or apartments. for whatever reason i don't know many seniors don't become friends with other seniors. at least in the casino they are not alone and maybe don't feel lonely. maybe they feel good if they get something free on their comp card. its not a great way to fight loneliness. but its probably better than sitting all day alone in an apartment.
everybody wants to go to heaven. but nobody wants to die.
ahiromu
ahiromu
Joined: Jan 15, 2010
  • Threads: 110
  • Posts: 1937
June 12th, 2017 at 11:49:36 AM permalink
Edit: Too aggressive before. Sorry

Also, social security is already means tested, re taxation thereof and on distribution. It's a full-fledged redistribution scheme, paying out low earners higher rates at the expense of higher earners. Completely removing the people that actually funded it (higher income types) would be unethical... more than the system already is. As far as I know, even Sanders (the most main stream far left politician) has only talked about raising the salary cap subject to SS.
Its - Possessive; It's - "It is" / "It has"; There - Location; Their - Possessive; They're - "They are"
odiousgambit
odiousgambit
Joined: Nov 9, 2009
  • Threads: 275
  • Posts: 7369
June 12th, 2017 at 12:23:21 PM permalink
Quote: ahiromu

even Sanders (the most main stream far left politician) has only talked about raising the salary cap subject to SS.



I saw something once that said this, if it goes far enough, would do far more to solve the shortfall than any other step, more effective than raising the retirement age [which so far has been the only politically viable option]
"Baccarat is a game whereby the croupier gathers in money with a flexible sculling oar, then rakes it home. If I could have borrowed his oar I would have stayed." .......... Mark Twain

  • Jump to: