7/10/11: I’ve done the math

If you are 40 or younger, you may think that social security will crash before you retire. I know that, until about 10 years ago, I thought I wouldn’t live to receive my earned benefits, or that the program would be dissembled before I retired. The closer you get, the more you begin to count on the system to come through for you. In my case, I do think I will see at least some of the benefits I have earned. 

I will turn 62 next February, making me eligible for social security benefits. I wanted to know if it would be advantageous to me to start collecting benefits then, or wait until “full retirement age” which for me is 66. There is also the option of delaying benefits until age 70. The monthly benefit increases if you wait longer to start collecting.  Here is an important piece of information: It is not necessary to stop working in order to start collecting. It is allowable to work between age 62 and 66 and still collect benefits, although the monthly benefit is reduced after a certain amount of earnings. The total benefit amount is then recalculated at age 66, so the penalty for early collection is really minimized somewhat, even if you work full-time during those years. 

The fantasy underlying this calculation is the idea that I could “stop” working in the world, and spend the rest of my life writing. The reality is that I have every reason to feel insecure about my ability to maintain full-time employment for 5 more years.

So I have done the math. The lifetime calculation depends, of course on how long one lives to collect benefits. If I wait until age 70, and then die that year, well, tough luck.  I would have to expect to live beyond age 80, to accrue more lifetime benefits by waiting til age 66. Only if I expected to live to age 85 would I benefit by waiting until age 70 (which is off the table anyway, the real question is 62 versus 66).

As of today, a woman born on my birth date can expect to live to age 82, which I am thinking is about right in my case.

(Pause here a minute to think about reaching the 20-years-to-go mark, it’s nothing really!)

So here is the math. It’s based on total lifetime benefits according to death age. I think it’s a no-brainer actually.

If I die at 70.
Age 62-70 = 9 years x 12 months = 108 months @ $1464/month = $158,112
Age 66-70 = 5 years x 12 months =  60 months @ $2,004/month = $ 120,240
Age 70-70 = 0 years x 12 months = 0 months @ $2712/month = 0

If I die at 75
Age 62-75 = 14 years x 12 months = 168 months @ $1464/month = $245,952

Age 66-75 = 10 years x 12 months = 120 months @ $2,004/month = $ 240,480
Age 70-75 = 5 years x 12 months = 60 months @ $2712/month = $ 162,720

If I die at 80
Age 62-80 = 19 yrs x 12 months =   228 months @ $ 1,464/month = $ 333,792
Age 66-80= 15 years x 12 months = 180 months@  $2,004/month = $ 360,720
Age 70-80 = 10 years x 12 months = 120 months@ $2,712/month = $ 325,440

If I die at 85
Age 62-85 = 24 years x 12 months = 288 months @ $1,464 = $421,632
Age 66-85 = 20 years x 12 months = 240 months @ $2,004 = $480,960
Age 70-85 = 15 years x 12 months = 180 months @ 2712/month = 488,520

This entry was posted in Recipes, Weather Report. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to 7/10/11: I’ve done the math

  1. Thank God you did the math, as I wouldn’t be up to it!

  2. Robin says:

    The other thing to think about, if you believe you can support yourself without Social Security until 66 or 70, is whether, when you aren’t working at all, can you live on that smaller amount? While I don’t think that SS will fall apart in our lifespans, I do think that it won’t keep up with inflation. And your medical bills not covered by Medicare will go up.

    And you/we come from long lived stock. If you discount the folks who smoked for a long time (and even including some of them — I think that Sylvan smoked all his life) 90 seems like a much more realistic number. I’m planning for the possibility of living to 90 (and being reasonably independent, for all but the very end). If I don’t, well, maybe my kids will get a nice surprise. And if I live to 100, they may have Mom on their hands, at least financially (because it won’t be rare enough that I can live off my notoriety ;-)

    • Best to consider my blog posts as “creative writing”. I clearly could not live now or later on $1400/month and continue to have shelter, health insurance, and a car. I do have some retirement funds, but nothing to brag about. I assume I have to wait until I pass 65 and get on Medicare.

      As far as longevity goes, I have more Denenberg genes than Levin genes. My dad’s mother died in her fifties of a stroke and all 4 of those sibs had hypertension and diabetes, although the women did live to be old with good medical management. More to the point, I honestly do not want to live that long. But I truly hope that you do.

  3. Robin says:

    Well, I don’t know about the genes, but for me, I’m definitely thinking “Had I known I was going to live that long, I would have taken better care of myself”. If my mind holds out, I have hopes of being active and engaged till the end (we have a friend who is 90 and plays golf regularly, till recently shot lower than his age, learned to use a computer actively well after he retired, etc. His only complaint is that his friends are dying off, and he didn’t put enough effort into making younger friends — but I’m learning from him). Now if the mind goes — and there does seem to be reason to fear that (on the Levin side; the Funks seem to be sentient to the end. I’m not aware of a single case of AD there.) — it’s a whole different story.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s