tkamd73 

Of course in the above case, you have to live to 79 to be money ahead. The govt. dangles that 8% a year in front of you, hoping you die before taking anything, or getting you to delay taking benefits, so less overall. It would be easy if we all new exactly when we were gonna die, so we could maximize the benefit, but that wouldn’t be any fun. Really, it’s only critical if you actually need the money to live.
Tim

philbob57

Of course, the life expectancy for a 62 year old is about 21.5 years for a male and 24.5 years for a female, so a break even age of 78 or 79 isn't all that bad.. As for investment returns and inflation, that's pretty trivial, too, if you accept that any estimate you make for your calculations probably won't match reality. None of us can predict very far into the future.
Where else can you get a guaranteed 8% return, especially in the last 10+ years?

tkamd73 

Thats what the government is hoping you think. No guarantees on life expectancy ever! Actually I got 18% this past year, go figure.
Tim

philbob57

Are you saying that 'the government' is lying about life expectancy and increase in Social Security payout, or are you just implying it?

Look, SocSec payout increases about (exactly?) 8% for each year a beneficiary delays drawing their benefit. I don't see how you can doubt that.

That's a guaranteed increase, and I don't see how you can doubt that. If you don't know the difference between a guaranteed annual return and a one year return, you need to do some study in that area. Forbes Magazine taught me about that, and they never thought of themselves as friends of government.

The life expectancy number I quoted is, I believe, the age at which 50% of people are expected to die earlier and the 50%, later. Death is guaranteed. The time at which each of us dies is unknown. The government can't change that fact, although it does have an impact of what that number is. (I think we do have a beef with our government over what has happened to that number over the last 50 years in the US.) I do think successive administrations have effectively lied about the changes in life expectancy, but I don't there's data that indicates the government has lied about what the number is.

Much of 'the government' is political. The politicals do twist facts. But other parts of 'the government' are charged with reporting as truthfully as possible to their political overseers. The politicals get truth; the politicals butcher it. The professionals get a lot of data, and they have a lot of skill at analyzing that data. Life expectancy numbers are public and verifiable. The data on which the numbers are based are public and verifiable. Thousands of actuaries, underwriters, and executives base their work on those numbers every day.

You can count on 78-79 (or whatever) is the break even point for Social Security.

You can count on 50% of 62 year old men living 21.5 years or more and 50% living shorter lives. You have to make a guess about which half you will be part of. That's life, not a 'government' lie.

tkamd73 

I’m not saying that at all! There is an 8% increase every year you wait, as stated in my initial post. What I’m saying is that there is no guarantee you, as an individual, will be around to benefit from that, in spite of actuarial statistics. That 8% is there simply so you will delay taking your benefit, not because our government wants to help you out!
Tim