The same situation occurs if your pension is tied to annuity payments. The longer you wait to collect, the larger will be the amount you'll receive per month.
Bu the longer you wait, the closer you'll be to death and you may end up receiving less.
@Miller,
401k plans are almost imune from garnishment, in the absence of qualified domestic payment orders. IRAs are more vulnerable, and yes, they will go after anything they can get. Even if they are willing to forgive the debt, the IRS won't let them have the tax writeoff unless they make a diligent effort to collect. The normal interpretation involves court action.
I don't think age 70 is unlikely in the future. I'm also reasonably sure that anyone aged 55 or more is not going to be affected by changes not presently enacted.
@mesquite,
Thanks for dropping in. Again, you were helpful when I needed help.
thanks to all for this helpful advice. I contimue to investigate. Actually if I take 62 retirement, according to those regular reports they send you, I'll get around 1000.00 a month. Because I don't intend to ever buy another house, and because I'm completely content in my small but very nice apartment, 1000.00 will cover my rent and utility bills. That would leave me with truck, insurance, and discretionary spending because I don't owe any money past medical expenses. My son receives SSI and pays rent as well for as long as he lives with me.
Strangely, in accordance with new regulations, Stephen MUST be responsible for half of rent and utilities out of his check, even though I previously have not charged him half, just a token amount to teach responsibility.
@blueveinedthrobber,
You're gambling that you won't have a medical emergency that will bankrupt you. Not smart. AND you're planning to dump the cost of whatever you can't pay the emergency room on my back, and I don't appreceiate the burden. I'm trying to do my part and play fair, and you are planning to make it more difficult for me and others like me (which is the majority).
@blueveinedthrobber,
blueveinedthrobber wrote:
I'll be 62 in May of next year and I'm thinking of taking early retirement.
Quote:I realize that by not waitng until I'm 65 it's a lesser amount of money and I can't earn as much on the side without affecting the payment, but I am healthy, my genetic footprint is long life and it's been put forth that if you add up the money if I live to be say 85, and most everyone in my family lives at LEAST that long, I'll end up with more money in the long run.
I'd very much like to hear your opinions and advice.
I already have a new affordable health plan. If I get sick I'll go the the ER whether I have any money or not and pay what I can. Healthcare and the government HAD their chance to make real change and said **** it.... so I'll be one of those government tit suckling scumbags.
I agree with your decision to take your SS benefits at 62. The Gov want everyone to wait till 70 years of age, because they're betting on your not living far beyond the 70 yr age limit. The longer you work, the more likely you'll age more rapidly, get sick, and die. Take the money and enjoy it, while you can. You earned a good life and now go for it...
@Davea8,
Davea8 wrote:
You're gambling that you won't have a medical emergency that will bankrupt you. Not smart. AND you're planning to dump the cost of whatever you can't pay the emergency room on my back, and I don't appreceiate the burden. I'm trying to do my part and play fair, and you are planning to make it more difficult for me and others like me (which is the majority).
I'm not gambling on a ******* thing. I'd buy insurance if it was affordable. They dropped me, not the other way around. I have as much sympathy for you poor put upon decent human beings as you have for a system gaming scumbag like me. None. Suffer ************.
