Farrell: The dilemma of whether to take early Social Security

  • Article by: CHRIS FARRELL
  • Updated: January 12, 2013 - 9:16 PM
  • 3
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
  • 1 - 3 of 3
dejadoodooJan. 13, 13 8:26 AM

Everyone over 62 should retire -- this makes room for a couple of younger people to move into the job force.

3
6
dunc0029Jan. 15, 13 2:21 PM

You fail to mention that, by waiting, you are also losing out on that income in the meantime! Sure you get more per month if you wait to age 70, but if you die at age 71, you would have gotten far more of a benefit by retiring at 62. The break-even point regarding life expectancy is far later than you'd think. This decision depends on your gender/life expectancy, and how bad you want to retire.

6
1
ciamanJan. 21, 13 1:55 PM

Mr. Chris Farrell, you always come down on the "wait until you are 70" side of the equation as if you have discovered some nugget of truth. In fact, most men are dead at 78 or so and woman live another 3 to 4 years more. But lets talk about men for once. If men do as you suggest is that they will wait and wait until they are a ripe 70 years of age. You know what, Mr. Farrell? Those men, on average, will get to enjoy their hard earned retirement for 8 years. Then they will be dead, sir. Do you think that is worth anything to wait for such a short time of live? The Golden years? No, those will be the rust years, sir. I would love to challenge many of these things with you but you get to always give us your opinons on this paper. No one else gets to tell you that, perhaps, sir, you are wrong from time to time. I retired at the age of 55 and I have never regetted it one moment. How about that, sir? And thank you, sir. Ciaman

4
1
  • 1 - 3 of 3

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT