About 20 percent of beneficiaries have a benefit of $1000 or less.

Data: https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/supplement/2022/5b.html#table5.b6

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about a Fed’s SS? Presumably, it could be up to 3k-4k. How wildly wrong am I?

You’re not. I’m 49 and make more than $140,000 and will have 30 years in when I retire. I’ll retire in that range. So will DH who makes quite a bit more, but is over the cap.

Most non-military feds get full social security.

I’m a high-ranking fed. I would get $4500 if I waited until I was 70 to start SS benefits. It’s $2800 if I take it right at 62, which is what I plan on doing since everything points to me being means tested out of the higher amount if I wait and Congress get serious about balancing the budget.

SS will not be phased out or means tested if you are a millennial or older. This drum has been banged for 40 years and there’s been no urgency to fix it. Congress will just keep increasing the salary limit and pushing the eligibility years out for Millennials and younger.

Waiting until you are 70 to take SS benefits is one of the smartest things you can do.

Only if you live past 82. And not much at that.

This. The break even is pretty far into the future. Not sure yet what we will do since for us SS is just a piece of our retirement, not the whole thing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm taking the thousand bucks at 62 with a plan to invest it. I can do a better job than the government's raise of 8% a year or whatever that was, and fear of ss being reduced because they have no funds.

But aren't you already doing that with a 401K etc? SS is diversification, it's more like an annuity in that it can't run out and is guaranteed at a certain amount. You want that certain amount to be as high as possible, actuarially. If you think you'll die soon, sure, take it at 62.

I have never had a retirement account offered at any of my jobs, never-ever. I opened a Roth because I have very low income.
I took a lot of risk outside of retirement account and it has paid off. I learned a lot since 2020 and I think I can do better than government.
If SS runs out, then I'd better take it early. I also may get more % -wise than high-earners who have a lot more to lose if SS is not guaranteed. Investing it from 62-67 is exactly the amount that will make up the $500 shortfall later, but I more control over it.
I'm fairly healthy and seems like I should live 91+ unless I get run over.
I have dual citizenship. I plan to move to lower cost of living homeland with organic local food and all my childhood friends. While living there is cheap with all the fresh air and no crowds, I can see us traveling all over and spending the money that way.
Retirement planning is extremely individual. I may have to revisit it if I'm not single anymore.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about a Fed’s SS? Presumably, it could be up to 3k-4k. How wildly wrong am I?

You’re not. I’m 49 and make more than $140,000 and will have 30 years in when I retire. I’ll retire in that range. So will DH who makes quite a bit more, but is over the cap.

Most non-military feds get full social security.

I’m a high-ranking fed. I would get $4500 if I waited until I was 70 to start SS benefits. It’s $2800 if I take it right at 62, which is what I plan on doing since everything points to me being means tested out of the higher amount if I wait and Congress get serious about balancing the budget.

SS will not be phased out or means tested if you are a millennial or older. This drum has been banged for 40 years and there’s been no urgency to fix it. Congress will just keep increasing the salary limit and pushing the eligibility years out for Millennials and younger.

Waiting until you are 70 to take SS benefits is one of the smartest things you can do.

Ok. Has nothing to do with what you’re responding to, but ok.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My father has two pensions and my mother never worked. She was so upset that her SS was only going to be about 1k I don't know if she applied for it. It was going to be her retirement play money. I really don't know what to make of her sometimes.

If she never worked how is getting 1000 a month?
My wife worked over 30 years and only gets 1000 a month. (Good thing we saved and invested a lot)

Makes no sense.

I think the minimal is about $700 est 62 even if the person has not worked or contributed.

Ok. Thank you for answering my question.

If their spouse did. If you personally never worked and aren't a spouse you get nothing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My parents were high earners who both started taking SS at age 70, this year they’re bringing in a combined $80k just in their SS income. If they live into their 90s like their own parents it’s a great deal.

In no way is SS ever a "great deal." If they had invested all contributions, they would have far more than the $80K in income (plus the capital left over to pass to their kids).

Isn’t it a good deal if you live to be really old? I had an aunt collecting SS into her 100s and it seems like she must have gotten out more than she put in through I never ran all of the numbers.

It also provided with your kids with guaranteed survivor's benefits until they were 18, you with guaranteed disability insurance your whole working life, and will provide your spouse with guaranteed retirement income until they die whether or not they worked.

Anonymous wrote:I'm taking the thousand bucks at 62 with a plan to invest it. I can do a better job than the government's raise of 8% a year or whatever that was, and fear of ss being reduced because they have no funds.

But aren't you already doing that with a 401K etc? SS is diversification, it's more like an annuity in that it can't run out and is guaranteed at a certain amount. You want that certain amount to be as high as possible, actuarially. If you think you'll die soon, sure, take it at 62.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about a Fed’s SS? Presumably, it could be up to 3k-4k. How wildly wrong am I?

You’re not. I’m 49 and make more than $140,000 and will have 30 years in when I retire. I’ll retire in that range. So will DH who makes quite a bit more, but is over the cap.

Most non-military feds get full social security.

I’m a high-ranking fed. I would get $4500 if I waited until I was 70 to start SS benefits. It’s $2800 if I take it right at 62, which is what I plan on doing since everything points to me being means tested out of the higher amount if I wait and Congress get serious about balancing the budget.

SS will not be phased out or means tested if you are a millennial or older. This drum has been banged for 40 years and there’s been no urgency to fix it. Congress will just keep increasing the salary limit and pushing the eligibility years out for Millennials and younger.

Waiting until you are 70 to take SS benefits is one of the smartest things you can do.

Only if you live past 82. And not much at that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about a Fed’s SS? Presumably, it could be up to 3k-4k. How wildly wrong am I?

You’re not. I’m 49 and make more than $140,000 and will have 30 years in when I retire. I’ll retire in that range. So will DH who makes quite a bit more, but is over the cap.

Most non-military feds get full social security.

I’m a high-ranking fed. I would get $4500 if I waited until I was 70 to start SS benefits. It’s $2800 if I take it right at 62, which is what I plan on doing since everything points to me being means tested out of the higher amount if I wait and Congress get serious about balancing the budget.

SS will not be phased out or means tested if you are a millennial or older. This drum has been banged for 40 years and there’s been no urgency to fix it. Congress will just keep increasing the salary limit and pushing the eligibility years out for Millennials and younger.

Waiting until you are 70 to take SS benefits is one of the smartest things you can do.

My estimate for retiring at 65 in 2034 says $3300 vs. 4570 if I wait till age 70.

Anonymous wrote:How can someone only get 1k for social security ??
68 year old. Did they not work? not shaming just wondering if my neighbor isn't lying how can they only get $1,000 of social security?

My immigrant neighbor earned about that in the 15 or so years she has been in the US and doing home attendant type work. She is also 68.
I respect her achievement much more than that of so many people who were privileged in being born here and having a leg up for college and their white collar jobs.

Anonymous wrote:How can you tell what your social security payout will be

Make an account with SS administration. Make sure it's the government website. They estimate it for you as of today.

Anonymous wrote:I’m a nanny and if I wait until I’m 70, I’ll get $2750 a month. I regret working for a very long term family who had me work half on/off the books, because they were the only thing me who benefitted from that arrangement. I made the same in cash after taxes. Ah well. I was young and dumb! I will have to wait until 70 to collect. I have about $250k in savings, my shitty condo is paid off, and will likely inherit 1-2 million. Im single and never married, wish I’d gone to college or had a job with a pension or benefits. I’ll be okay, but poor.

I'm sorry you made a mistake while you, but maybe do your budget and see if you can retire a bit younger if you want to. If you'll inherit 1-2 million, the income from that plus Social Security in a paid off condo might make it possible.

You know, I went to college and even got a grad degree and quit soon after to have kids. I regret it sometimes, but the difference we've made in kids' lives (I also have worked as a pre-school teacher) really does mean something, even if it's not something people talk about much.

I’m a nanny and if I wait until I’m 70, I’ll get $2750 a month. I regret working for a very long term family who had me work half on/off the books, because they were the only thing me who benefitted from that arrangement. I made the same in cash after taxes. Ah well. I was young and dumb! I will have to wait until 70 to collect. I have about $250k in savings, my shitty condo is paid off, and will likely inherit 1-2 million. Im single and never married, wish I’d gone to college or had a job with a pension or benefits. I’ll be okay, but poor.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about a Fed’s SS? Presumably, it could be up to 3k-4k. How wildly wrong am I?

You’re not. I’m 49 and make more than $140,000 and will have 30 years in when I retire. I’ll retire in that range. So will DH who makes quite a bit more, but is over the cap.

Most non-military feds get full social security.

I’m a high-ranking fed. I would get $4500 if I waited until I was 70 to start SS benefits. It’s $2800 if I take it right at 62, which is what I plan on doing since everything points to me being means tested out of the higher amount if I wait and Congress get serious about balancing the budget.

SS will not be phased out or means tested if you are a millennial or older. This drum has been banged for 40 years and there’s been no urgency to fix it. Congress will just keep increasing the salary limit and pushing the eligibility years out for Millennials and younger.