Money expert Clark Howard has always advocated waiting to take Social Security. When you wait to take Social Security, you receive a much larger benefit than you would if you took it as soon as you can.
Read more about when to take Social Security here:
*****
For information on how you can save money every day visit Clark.com
Like us on Facebook:
Follow us on Instagram:
Follow us on Twitter:
Follow us on Pinterest: …(read more)
LEARN MORE ABOUT: IRA Accounts
CONVERTING IRA TO GOLD: Gold IRA Account
CONVERTING IRA TO SILVER: Silver IRA Account
REVEALED: Best Gold Backed IRA
Clark Howard, a renowned personal finance expert, has weighed in on the topic of delaying your social security benefit. Howard is known for his plain-spoken approach to financial matters, and his take on the issue is no different – he advocates for delaying your social security benefit for as long as possible.
The reason for this, according to Howard, is that delaying your benefit can have a significant impact on the amount of money you ultimately receive from the government. In general, the longer you wait to start collecting your benefit, the larger the monthly payments you will receive. For example, if you were born in 1954 and started collecting at age 62, your monthly benefit would be around $1,800. However, if you waited until age 70, your benefit would increase to around $3,000 per month.
Howard argues that delaying your benefit is particularly advantageous if you are in good health and expect to live a long life. This is because the increased monthly payments you receive from delaying your benefit can more than make up for the years of payments you missed by waiting. For example, if you delayed your benefit until age 70 and lived until age 90, you would receive roughly the same amount of money as someone who started collecting at age 62 and lived until age 82.
There are, of course, some downsides to delaying your social security benefit. For one thing, you will have to wait longer to receive any payments from the government. This can be challenging for some people, particularly those who are struggling financially. Additionally, there is always the risk that the government could revise the social security system or change the rules around collecting benefits in a way that undermines the value of delaying your benefit.
Despite these potential downsides, Howard believes that delaying your social security benefit is a smart financial move for most people. To make the most of this strategy, it’s important to carefully consider your personal circumstances and consult with a financial advisor if you’re unsure about what to do. With a little bit of planning, delaying your social security benefit can help you maximize your retirement income and achieve long-term financial stability.
Think about how much money you’re leaving on the table between age 62 and 70 and how many years it’ll take you to recoup that / break even. Here’s a hint……it will take MANY years and at that point your health may be so bad that you can’t even enjoy your retirement or you may be in the ground. I say take the money as soon as you can and enjoy it while you’re still relatively young. The government is literally banking on the fact that a large percentage of the population will die before age 70 and never enjoy any of the money they put into Social Security. A bird in hand is always better than two in the bush.
I've waited until 70 (starting two months prior to 70) and I'm really glad I did !! I'm still working, too.
8 years at a reduced rate is much better than 8 years of Nothing.
What are your thoughts since interest rates are rising?
Waiting until 67 until you start drawing your SS means you won’t break even until you a 78 years old. If you turn 62 in 2023 that means you won’t break even until the year 2039. Who thinks we won’t have war with China or Russia or someone way before then. 31 trillion in debt now. Who thinks the government won’t find a way to “take our money”, if they feel it’s necessary. How many think they will deal honestly with the American people? Every President since Reagan has dipped into SS for other things. Republicans and Democrats. I worked with a lot of people that didn’t get any SS or got a year or two then they died. Tomorrow not promised anyway. If you have a easy job it’s one thing, but most companies try to load it’s older employees up with so much they will retire early.
Me and my wife are doing what you suggest, we will retire at 65, but draw from savings until full retirement age at 66 and 10 months. We feel very good about this decision.
I don’t think SS allows the “ buy back” option anymore. Also, isn’t the higher amount at 70 compared to 62 based on you continuing to work and pay taxes? If you retire early and live off savings without working your SS would not go up as much-just my speculation
If you take later with draws you would have to work 17 years to get back what you loss in those 3 years
Notice Clark doesnt say a word about low funds future?
Clark, some of the politicians are threatening to reduce SS benefits. This is a good reason to take SS now. A bird in the hand………
.
Very true but I got a high payment because of commission earnings on a W2 and I always contribute the maximum amount.
Rich people collect at 70. Poor people collect at 62. Poor people should stop making bad decisions. Collet at 70. Be smart!
I'm getting mine at 62. I don't trust the government to "sunset" SS or the system to run out of money. Besides, I"m in a demographic that dies earlier than the average American.
What are your thoughts now that interest rates are rising?
Wait until you are 70 to collect. Don''t believe me, look at your statement.
People collect at 62 because of free health care. By receiving free health care- people dont take care of themselves. They are giant blobs. No incentive to stay in shape when someone else is paying all your doctor's bills. These blobs of humanity go on disability in their 50s until it can be switched over in their 60s to Soc Sec.
My concern with delaying SS to 67 or later is that it could put your higher earning years, in retirement, at the back end of retirement. I originally planned on taking it at 62 but am now leaning toward 65 for two reasons, 1) so that I retain a sizeable portion of my retirement accounts, and; 2) that allows me to spend more in my early & mid 60's on things I want to do. No matter what you decide it is a roll of the dice as no one is guaranteed tomorrow so do your homework.
Do you smoke? Are you fat? If the answer to one of these questions is yes, take SS at 62. Otherwise wait until you are 70.
I am waiting. I have other income and investment so between those my taxes on SS will reduce its value.
Why must it always be "62?" Why not retire at 65? I'm thinking of doing that. I lost $39k skipping 62-65, but if i wait til 67 it'll turn into a $72k loss and the calculation shows i won't break even from that til I'M 80 YRS OLD! If I wait til I'm 70 i won't break even til i'm dead.
I skipped 3 years and lost $39k, if I go another 2 years waiting til age 67 my loss will be $72k by waiting 5 yrs. I ran the calculations and won't break even until I'm 80 yrs old, and I could very well die at 78. So it depends on how much you lose from waiting.
It's different for everyone. It's not a "One Size Fits All" situation. People with health conditions probably want the early retirement so they can travel or do things they enjoy before their conditions make that impossible. I have been diagnosed with heart disease. I feel fine, and I see a doctor. The vast majority of my family members died in their 70s. I may or may not take it at 62, but I sure won't wait until full retirement age just to get more money. That would be foolish given my family history and personal diagnosis.
I’m definitely waiting. My wife is 11 years younger than I am so she can get my benefit when I am gone. Long lived ancestors in my family so barring accidents I should make it to 85 or 90 anyway. I retired at 61 and I have plenty of money and no debts .
Here somethin else to think about.
The more wealthy you are the longer you live ( you can ask you doctor, he knows) … and the less you probably depend on social security.
But the poorer you are the shorter your predicted lifespan is…
What happens to far too many people is they work in low paying jobs just as long as they are able..but in their late 50s and early 60s their bodies start to give out.. and they take early social security because the need it
OTOH, the wealthy are also healthier and can afford to take social security later….