% of bankroll to put in the stock market

[Fire Walker]

I've owned them for over 15 years and they've done just fine. No drama. I'll check back with you though after another 20 years. Anybody reading who has interest might want to research what other experts out there say. I'm referring to funds composed of hundreds of these bonds. I'm not saying an individual is wise to buy one or two or three bonds. Buffett (you spelled his name wrong) is known for his expertise in stocks, not bonds.

I've probably spelled a better man's name worse. I'm nearly 100% certain of it.

[tomf23]

Wondering why all the discussion revolves around age 65 when, in fact, everyone faces the decision at age 62 as to whether or not to defer, and you receive the 100% value of your payout at age 66. Then, you earn the bonus to age 70.

There are many more complications with husband and wife. And, of course, the discussion did not assume any return on the funds taken early, which is also a consideration.

Don

isn't saying 66 is the full amount and 70 is the bonus amount just semantics with age 70 being the real full amount?

[DSchles]

isn't saying 66 is the full amount and 70 is the bonus amount just semantics with age 70 being the real full amount?

You can say that, but it isn't the way it is explained or defined by the SSA. 66 is the full pay. 62, you take a haircut. 67-70, you get a bonus for waiting. Not my language.

Don

[BoSox]

I plan to take my benefits the day Im eligible. 1.) It is not in my nature to leave money on the table. 2.) I don't "know" how long I'm going to live. 3.) What difference does it make if the cheese starts to fall off your cracker?

Just about what I expected from you Moses, you most likely take even money on your $10 blackjacks.

[BoSox]

Just to have a little fun here:

You are deciding you can do without the money for the first 5 years if you defer.

True this option is a real gamble where you could very well kick the bucket without having received a single dime, or very little if you lived only to slightly above seventy. Remember you decided you can do this because at the time you did not need the money. In exchange you will be compensated 32% "of course if you live to see it" more if you defer, when you may actually need it.

If you are right you can take the payments and invest the money in a tax free bond fund that gets around 4% return per year for 13 to 18 years depending on what month you got the payment. Considering the growth on the money by the deferral date you have over $130K sitting there earning 4% per year which is over $5K+ per year. There is 13 years left and the $5K+/year is more than half of the $9600 you gain per year if you defer so the break even point would actually be at least another 13 years. The odds of you living to the new break even point of 97 are:

Tthree, technically speaking, if one was to follow your plan and retire early and invest the Social Security money for 13 to 18 years having saved slightly over $ 130 k extra in their bond savings, could this not also be considered a real gamble or deferral? Because you also have not actually spent a dime yet , but have saved a little more for your blood thirsty heirs to find more reasons to get rid of you. Most likely the extra $130 k will not all be there anyway since you most likely gave some to the blood thirsty relatives who pretended you were their best friend.

[ZeeBabar]

I opted to claim mine at 66 cause I was working full time. This meant, I would pay taxes on my SS income plus I knew of no way I could securely get 8% interest each year.

[Joe Mama]

there is one more consideration which tilts in favor of claiming early which no one mentioned and i just found out about today in researching my own benefits. s.s. payouts are adjusted each year upward by what they call a COLA in order to offset inflation. they make some abstruse calculation to determine how much the increase is or if there is any increase. however, that increase is only applied to somebody who is ALREADY receiving benefits. it is not applied to a person's estimated benefits. so, when comparing benefits at age 62 to 70 the difference is not as great as we have been calculating because the person who claims benefits at age 62 is eligible to receive a COLA every single year between 62 and 70. it's worth repeating again: the difference in the size of the payout is not as great as many assume. so, if at age 62 they estimate your payout at age 70 to be $2500 that estimate will not change when you actually reach age 70. And obviously, the buying power of $2500 will usually decrease by a great amount in 8 years.

Think you may need to read the social security calculation rules thoroughly on their website before giving advice. Your earnings for each year that goes into the calculation is indexed for inflation, the indices are recalculated each October. I am 68 and have not chosen to take my ss retirement -- the calculations I get from social security reflect both the 8% per year increase after full retirement age (in my case 66) and any COLA adjustments.

[Joe Mama]

I apologize for being so gruff in my response

[Freightman]

true in Canada, not sure about the US.

Employees or self employed individuals who take early CPP (Canada Pension) are still required to make CPP contributions to age 65. Adjustments are then made to CPP payments on an annual basis to reflect the additional contributions.

[Joe Mama]

true in Canada, not sure about the US.

Employees or self employed individuals who take early CPP (Canada Pension) are still required to make CPP contributions to age 65. Adjustments are then made to CPP payments on an annual basis to reflect the additional contributions.

Generally earned income is subject to ss taxes regardless of age or retirement status. Your social security and/or other pensions and IRA distributions are not considered to be earned income. This makes choosing how you treat your gambling winnings after retirement kind of tricky. If you choose professional gambler status you can deduct expenses associated with your "gambling business" (travel expenses, training software, losses, etc.)-- but you will also have to pay self employment taxes (~2X ss taxes) on your net gambling income. If you do not choose professional gambler status, then your gambling "hobby" net winnings are not considered to be earned income and are not subject to ss taxes (when I say net winnings, you can deduct any gambling losses from your winnings.) Another consideration is that if you do not choose professional gambler status, your Medicare premium is tied to your adjusted gross income before you deduct gambling losses, where as a professional gambler, only your net gambling income affects the adjusted gross income and your Medicare payment.

[scroogemcduck]

It depends on the liquidity of your brokerage account and how quickly you can convert it to physical cash and how low the transaction fees are. Takes about 4 days for me and costs next to nothing. So basically cash reserves don't need to be bigger than trip bankroll.

[Midwest Player]

what % of your bankroll do you like to keep in the stock market vs how much cash on hand / high interest savings account / redeemable CDs or w/e do you prefer to keep in case you start losing?

I like to look at it like how much of your assets do you want to devote to blackjack. I consider blackjack just one investment of many.

[BoSox]

"Originally Posted by Bigdaddy
My conclusion is (contrary to popular opinion) that it is probably best in most cases to take at age 66. You can decide for yourself."


Three replied with:
"I helped my uncle with this decision a while back and came to the same conclusion. When I pointed out he could park the money he would defer and earn a return on it he saw the decision wasn't even close. In the very unlikely event that he lived long enough to start accruing a tiny bit extra he would likely not be able to do anything with it anyway."


Further down Moses wrote:

"Unless you are telling me you can take it with you. Acquiring assets is one thing. Enjoying them is quite another. i have to admit being far better at the former than the latter. But Im working on it. "


I put a few bad jokes in the thread, but when all was said and done I decided to take the advice of you three brilliant mathematical minds, and take Social Security at full pay, without the bonus. Thank you all, the subject came up at the perfect time for me.