|
Post by mnfish on Apr 24, 2023 13:56:59 GMT
www.statista.com/statistics/241488/population-of-the-us-by-sex-and-age/There are 26.2M men ages 60-74 There are 9.35M men ages 75 and up So, 64% of us are not going to collect a dime after age 74. And from the chart, less than 16% of us will reach the, so called "break-even" age As far as extra money for the best nursing home, I visited my lady friends' 84YO mother on Saturday who has been in care for 3 years and has dementia. I don't know if her or any of the others would notice if they were receiving top-notch care or not. I doubt if the staff would treat anyone differently if they were "private pay" or Medicaid but it's a small town nursing home so I'm sure there are big city nursing home nightmare stories out there. Medicaid takes a percentage of your SS check whether it's $1,000 or $4,000.
|
|
|
Post by bobfl on Apr 24, 2023 14:02:07 GMT
4 .... as you get "old", your ability to actually USE the money you're getting decreases.
Sure glad you guys will never need to go into a senior home or need supplemental in-home care. So as you get old does your ability to actually USE the money you're getting decrease or increase? From all my recent relative experiences, I would vote, increase. Example, can I afford to bring in a caregiver for 4 hours a day or 6 hours a day, that I really need, at $40 per hour.
|
|
|
Post by richardsok on Apr 24, 2023 14:47:17 GMT
|
|
|
Post by bobfl on Apr 24, 2023 15:07:43 GMT
www.statista.com/statistics/241488/population-of-the-us-by-sex-and-age/There are 26.2M men ages 60-74 There are 9.35M men ages 75 and up So, 64% of us are not going to collect a dime after age 74. And from the chart, less than 16% of us will reach the, so called "break-even" age As far as extra money for the best nursing home, I visited my lady friends' 84YO mother on Saturday who has been in care for 3 years and has dementia. I don't know if her or any of the others would notice if they were receiving top-notch care or not. I doubt if the staff would treat anyone differently if they were "private pay" or Medicaid but it's a small town nursing home so I'm sure there are big city nursing home nightmare stories out there. Medicaid takes a percentage of your SS check whether it's $1,000 or $4,000. Don't count on medicare. I spoke with several homes for a relative who thought she would go in with medicare. Usually the flat answer was, "We have a very long waiting list for our limited Medicare beds. None available at this time. Check elsewhere." When you apply for admittance, they carefully check how much money you have so they can take it all and get "full pay" while it is draining down. After they take all your money, then you can qualify for Medicare. They get so much less from Medicare. But the spots are very limited. Maybe in a small town they open for Medicare because they have empty beds. True, employees supposedly don't know if you pay full price or are "Medicare". If my wife goes into a home with dementia I will also move into the Assisted Living part. She might not know where she is, but I'll know where I am, hopefully. I will pick based on the govt rating on these facilities. Also, it is all about skilled nursing, not dementia care, which is commonly offered. A skilled nursing facility is the hard one to get into, even at full pay. The place we are planning for ( a mile down the street) has a multi-year waiting list at full pay (about $13,000 per month). The other place that offers it has a one star rating with the govt. Very bad. I remember when a senior home was about $3000 per month 12 years ago; now, way over 10 grand a month. Bottomline, it is different for everyone. Our LTHC pays about $400 a DAY and is inflation protected so that will help. And whatever you do; do your own thing and be happy about it. We can only plan so much.
|
|
|
Post by racqueteer on Apr 24, 2023 15:40:29 GMT
Sure glad you guys will never need to go into a senior home or need supplemental in-home care. So as you get old does your ability to actually USE the money you're getting decrease or increase? From all my recent relative experiences, I would vote, increase. Example, can I afford to bring in a caregiver for 4 hours a day or 6 hours a day, that I really need, at $40 per hour. Absolutely; that ‘worst case’ situation represents a whole other situation to consider. I’m not sure, however, how much help a higher SS payment is going to be in this case? I’m just hoping that I never have to find out!
|
|
|
Post by Fearchar on Apr 24, 2023 15:43:55 GMT
My Dad passed away age 88 and never needed nursing care. No dementia either.
The key is good diet, exercise and stay connected with friends and family.
I recall him saying he never thought he would live so long considering his bypass surgery at age 62, which is when he retired and started collecting SS.
|
|
|
Post by archer on Apr 24, 2023 19:23:38 GMT
www.statista.com/statistics/241488/population-of-the-us-by-sex-and-age/There are 26.2M men ages 60-74 There are 9.35M men ages 75 and up So, 64% of us are not going to collect a dime after age 74. And from the chart, less than 16% of us will reach the, so called "break-even" age As far as extra money for the best nursing home, I visited my lady friends' 84YO mother on Saturday who has been in care for 3 years and has dementia. I don't know if her or any of the others would notice if they were receiving top-notch care or not. I doubt if the staff would treat anyone differently if they were "private pay" or Medicaid but it's a small town nursing home so I'm sure there are big city nursing home nightmare stories out there. Medicaid takes a percentage of your SS check whether it's $1,000 or $4,000. Those population demographics are not an accurate representation of longevity, but rather just the current population ages which have been affected by birth rate, and immigration. When it comes to SN, It is probably true that within any facility everyone gets the same care, but the better facilities will have wealthier clientele as I higher % of total beds. For medicaid, one is more likely to end up in the county home. I have seen the difference with my great aunt and Grandmother in the county homes, and my parents who had more money to get into a better home. Also, in my parents case, they had bought into a retirement community which had their own skilled nursing facility if and when the time came.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 24, 2023 19:30:25 GMT
I have decided to do Roth Conversions as much as I can until 2025 (I will be 63) when Tax Brackets may change, depending on who get's in. If Trump get's in again or other Republican then they may keep the existing Tax Brackets. In this case I may do a few more years of Roth conversions. My backup plan, if Republican's don't get in is to use my Tax Advantage monies first so it does not impact the RMD's in future. I guess it is a gamble if we are going to live longer or not!
|
|
|
Post by gman57 on Apr 24, 2023 20:35:44 GMT
I have decided to do Roth Conversions as much as I can until 2025 (I will be 63) Smart... I used the time from 53 when I retired to 63 (start of SS) to convert the max I could each year and pay no tax. Looking back, I wish I had converted more even if it meant paying some tax at the time.
|
|
|
Post by roi2020 on Apr 24, 2023 22:05:12 GMT
Much of the discussion in this thread (haven't read every post) seems to center around the "break-even" age for claiming Social Security. There doesn't appear to be much enthusiasm for utilizing Social Security as longevity insurance.
If a recipient starts claiming at age 70 vs. age 67, their benefit will permanently increase by 30% (increase will be greater after SS COLA) for life. For recipients fortunate to live to their 90s or beyond, the increased benefit would be appreciated by many during this stage of life.
Social Security has often been described as the best annuity you can buy.
Claiming early and investing the proceeds in equities vs. deferring claiming is an apple-to-oranges comparison. Since Social Security is basically risk-free, investing the proceeds in commercial annuities or Treasury bonds may be a more apt comparison.
|
|
|
Post by Mustang on Apr 25, 2023 15:34:50 GMT
Looking at the charts the average life expectancy for someone my age is 12 more years. For my wife its 20. The problem with averages is that half will not make it. In the last year two very good friends and a good friend's wife died. The last year without her has been very hard. Living long means watching friends and spouses die.
I knew a guy a few years older in really poor health whose wife died. He made all of the arrangements. When everything was taken care of he went to her grave and killed himself. I really don't blame him. He was looking at a short, painful existence. The only reason he put up with the suffering that long was to take care of her.
My motorcycle club (I still ride a Harley.) raises money for the disadvantaged. One of the things we do is buy Christmas gifts for the forgotten in nursing homes. Many have children that have moved away or are too busy to visit. The last few years I have been blessed to play Santa Claus. One of the most telling things was when the nursing home manager broke down in tears as we were leaving thanking us for being there.
The average stay in a nursing home is three years. Some recover from medical problems and some don't. Some live out the rest of their lives in beds or in wheel chairs. My half brother spent five years in a wheel chair, paralyzed, unable to speak. He tried once but unable to kill himself he remained trapped in a fate that really was worse than death. People merely existing, not living, add longevity to those numbers.
For some the mind starts dying while the body continues. If someone's memory is gone and they can't do the most basic things for themselves, are they really there or is the empty shell just adding more longevity to the numbers. I'm not sure some in the nursing home could even comprehend that they were getting a Christmas gift. Pretty much it was just an empty stare and we set their gifts on the table next to them.
The chart might say that those who live to 70 average 14 more years. I'm not sure who I feel the sorriest for. Those who don't make it or those that do.
Me? I cannot live life afraid of death. It is coming for everyone. That does not mean live only for today and to heck with tomorrow. Half will live to see tomorrow. But is does mean don't live only for tomorrow.
I've met people still riding at 78. Maybe I'll make 80, maybe I won't. But I'd like to die with my boots on not trapped in a living hell.
Even though we didn't need it my wife and I took social security at 62 and invested it for later. It might later be used for a nice vacation or to help pay nursing home costs. Who knows. I don't intend to worry about it. The future is uncertain. The only thing we can do is to try to balance present needs with future ones.
|
|
|
Post by richardsok on Apr 26, 2023 2:55:49 GMT
Thinking about theoretical odds and retirement and I came up with a REALLY stupid probability problem. I know I learned this in high school but have forgotten it.
Say I toss a die three times. What are the odds that in three throws I never toss either a 1 or a 2 ?
Clearly the first throw is 66%, but after that ....?
|
|
|
Post by archer on Apr 26, 2023 4:12:01 GMT
I really don't get the importance placed on breaking even. All my retirement planning is based on a 30 yr time horizon, which is long past the break even age. As for when to claim SS, my question is what will be most helpful in meeting my goal of having the most money in my PF when I die in 30 years or so. That answer will differ for different people depending on how much they need or plan to live on, how conservatively or aggressively they invest in savings, future inflation, how long they plan to work, etc.
|
|
|
Post by archer on May 7, 2023 5:08:37 GMT
I ran some numbers specific to my situation and plan to delay SS another year. Currently I am living off of savings in my taxable account, withdrawing about $32K/yr for all my expenses including fed and state tax on $40K roth conversions. I have been doing this for a few years now. In comparing starting SS in Jan 2024 vs Jan 2025, I will make an additional $240/mo for life if I delay. If I were to start in 2024, I would avoid spending down my savings by $32K. It is pretty hard to earn $240/month from that $32K savings. However, earning 5% in a balanced PF, I would break even in 15 years, and at that point start earning more than $240/mo. Given the above, I could go either way. However, due to my SS income, staring in 2024, I would either have to forego my annual roth conversion or pay over $7K in taxes. I think that tips the scale in favor of delaying. There are variables in the above that could change the outcome, such as earning 10% rather than 5%, or needing to spend more than $32K. So, everyone's situation is unique. It is hard to make a one size fits all plan for when to claim. It seems for a lot of folks, it comes down to that experiment where they gave kids a choice whether to have one piece of candy today or 2 pieces tomorrow. That's OK too. My parents, and 3 grandparents lived into their mid-late 90's and one aunt over 100. I'm erring on the side of possibly living longer than I may wish to. Mustang, I appreciate your post about your motorcycle club. It gives a good name to a recreation that is often held with suspect. A friend of mine is in a motorcycle club here in Norcal that also does a lot of charity work. He also is a top fuel Harley racer. 1000 lbs, and 1000 HP. He just won a meet in NC. 1/4 mile in 6.54 seconds. Crazy!
|
|
|
Post by chang on May 7, 2023 6:17:53 GMT
Thinking about theoretical odds and retirement and I came up with a REALLY stupid probability problem. I know I learned this in high school but have forgotten it. Say I toss a die three times. What are the odds that in three throws I never toss either a 1 or a 2 ? Clearly the first throw is 66%, but after that ....? This is very simple. The probability of not getting a 1 or a 2 (throwing only one die) is 4/6 = 2/3. Hence the probability of not getting a 1 or a 2 in three successive throws is (2/3)^3 = 8/27. You multiply the probabilities, as long as the outcomes of each throw are independent (the result of the first does not affect the second). To see that, just draw a table of the 6 x 6 = 36 possible outcomes of throwing a die twice. (Which is the same, of course, as throwing two dice once. For that matter, your problem is the same as throwing 3 dice once; there are 6 x 6 x 6 = 216 outcomes, but you don’t need to draw that!)
|
|