I haven't met a financial advisor yet that has been able to back up what he says. Not a one.
And this says to wait till 70 for most folks...
If you can’t wait until 7 , this is the next best age to claim Social Security benefits
And 62 vs 65 the difference is 30% less - forever. So 1000 at 65 is 700 at 62. The 3 years in between at $700/mo is 25,600. To earn that back if you start collecting the full 1000 at 65 is 7 years. BUT you're still working...so it's not like you're destitute.
If I'm to live to say, 81, the avg I suppose these days, I'll get 19 years at 700/mo or 16 years at 1000/mo - $159,600 vs $192,000. Since most of my ancestors lived to 95 (or more) odds are pretty good I will too, short of disease or accident (and at 57 i'm healthy - never spent a night in the hospital yet) - 65 gets me 30 years, $360,000. 62 gets me $226,800.
Should I live to 95 and work to say, 68, 3 extra years, I should get a total of $421,000 - 20k a year more total benefit for each add'l year worked. I can't save that much per year.
There is no guarantee of how long you'll live of course. But then life is a gamble - how much have you paid in insurance premiums for car, home, life, health, etc vs how much have you collected? Unless I do fairly soon my term life insurance payments were a totally bad bet. I'm way behind in the car world, maybe even in the homeowners world, and woefully behind in business insurance premiums vs claims.
Financial advisor advises to take the money at 62. said if you wait, you'll have to live xxx number of years to make up what I didn't take
I sold my business and retired four years ago. I'm taking my charity as soon as They'll let me have it :laughing: