top Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Forced to retire, some take Social Security early

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Forced to retire, some take Social Security early

    August 8, 2010

    Paul Skidmore's office is shuttered, his job gone, his 18-month job search fruitless and his unemployment benefits exhausted. So at 63, he plans to file this week for Social Security benefits, three years earlier than planned.
    "All I want to do is work," said Skidmore, of Finksburg, Md., who was an insurance claims adjuster for 37 years before his company downsized and closed his office last year. "And nobody will hire me."

    It is one of the most striking fallouts from the bad economy: Social Security is facing its first-ever shortfall this year as a wave of people like Skidmore opt to collect payments before their full retirement age. Adding to the strain on the trust are reduced tax collections sapped by the country's historic unemployment -- still at 9.5 percent.

    More people filed for Social Security in 2009 -- 2.74 million -- than any year in history, and there was a marked increase in the number receiving reduced benefits because they filed ahead of their full retirement age. The increase came as the full Social Security retirement age rose last year from 65 to 66.

    Nearly 72 percent of men who filed opted for early benefits in 2009, up from 58 percent the previous year. More women also filed -- 74.7 percent in 2009 compared with 64.2 percent the previous year.

    Jason Fichtner, an associate commissioner at the Social Security Administration, said the weak economy has led more people who lost their jobs to retire early. However, it also has forced some people hard-hit by the recession and in need of a bigger paycheck to push back retirement and stay in the work force longer.

    "But we're seeing more people taking early benefits than staying in the workforce longer," Fichtner said.

    Like Skidmore, 63-year-old Jan Gissel of Tustin, Calif., also was forced into retirement early. She turned to unemployment benefits when her technical support business failed and filed for Social Security last September. Together, the checks are keeping her afloat.

    "I knew I had to have an income from somewhere, and my business wasn't giving it to me," she said. "I just went online and, boom, three weeks later I had the check."

    Gissel wants to continue working but still hasn't found a job. Although she didn't expect to be cashing Social Security checks so soon, she's grateful for the support it has provided.

    "I needed it way earlier than I thought," she said.

    In the annual report of the Social Security program released Thursday, the trustees said that pension and disability payments will exceed revenues for this year and 2011, reflecting the deep recession.

    The report forecast that the program would return to the black in 2012 through 2014, but that benefit payments will again exceed tax collections in 2015. For every year after 2015, the report projects that Social Security will be paying out more than it receives in tax collections as 78 million baby boomers begin retiring.

    The trustees did not focus on the growth of early retirees in their report, as they don't expect the early retirees to significantly drain funds over the long-term. Early opt-ins receive smaller monthly checks so that they aren't projected to receive any more money over a lifetime than they would if they had waited to collect Social Security until their full retirement age.

    People entitled to full benefits at 66 would receive 75 percent of their check if they began collecting four years early. Conversely, if they waited until they turned 70, collecting four years late, they would earn 32 percent more.

    They would receive the decreased -- or increased -- percentages for the rest of their life.

    "From the trustees' perspective it's a wash, because they calculate you'll get the same total benefit," said Maria Freese, director of government relations and policy at the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare.

    Freese added, though, that beneficiaries generally only opt in early because they have to.

    "When you retire early, you are taking a hit in your monthly check, and most people don't do that voluntarily," she said. "They either do that because they aren't healthy enough to keep working or because they lost their job."

    Nora Lopez, 62, of Hialeah, Fla., retired from her job as an elementary school teacher last year and began collecting Social Security. She did so, in part, because of health problems. When her school district offered teachers the option of keeping their health insurance coverage until they qualified for Medicare at 65, she decided she could get by on her pension and Social Security.

    "I wanted to work as long as I could," she said. "But it was hard for me to do that."

    For some, it's simply a matter of doing the math that prompts them to cash in early. Jack Dixon, 63, of Naples, Fla., stopped working full-time in April as a trolley driver and tour guide, cutting back to one day a week. He decided to do it after his wife figured out they'd be able to get by even with the reduced Social Security benefit.

    "Why should I go out there to the hustle and bustle and stress and all the stuff that's related to work if I don't have to?" he asked.

    USA TODAY delivers current national and local news, sports, entertainment, finance, technology, and more through award-winning journalism, photos, and videos.
    Filed Chapter 7 July 2010
    Attended 341 September 2010
    Discharged November 2010 Closed November 2010

    #2
    At least these folks have an option as to be able to do something...what about the folks in their 50's or early 60's who cannot yet even think about retiring and have lost their jobs and due to their age or being "over qualified" for available positions cannot find work? Not even flipping burgers? Some are lucky and have a working spouse and utilize benefits from the spouses' employer but what happens if the spouse loses their job or the person is single and the unemployment benefits run out? Food stamps? Welfare? Move in with family/children? It's a nightmare out there for some older folks...
    _________________________________________
    Filed 5 Year Chapter 13: April 2002
    Early Buy-Out: April 2006
    Discharge: August 2006

    "A credit card is a snake in your pocket"

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by Flamingo View Post
      At least these folks have an option as to be able to do something...what about the folks in their 50's or early 60's who cannot yet even think about retiring and have lost their jobs and due to their age or being "over qualified" for available positions cannot find work? Not even flipping burgers? Some are lucky and have a working spouse and utilize benefits from the spouses' employer but what happens if the spouse loses their job or the person is single and the unemployment benefits run out? Food stamps? Welfare? Move in with family/children? It's a nightmare out there for some older folks...

      Sooner or later they won't have an option.

      Social Security will be bankrupt sooner then later due to the Unemployment problem so these folks will be paid either with Calf style IOU's or with printed money. If it's the latter as I think it will be the check won't be enough to buy a six pack of Alpo.
      The essence of freedom is the proper limitation of Government

      Comment


        #4
        If the government can afford to spend hundreds of billions of dollars on ridiculous wars in the Middle East, it can certainly afford to continue to pay Social Security benefits, even if the system is bankrupt.

        As things stand right now, the Social Security system is calculated to become insolvent late in the next decade.

        I'll be dead long before then, so no worries for me!

        Comment


          #5
          i recently got scrutinized badly for mentioning while in college taking economic i rec'd a d on a paper because i REFUSED to figure ss in my future "retirement" budget.

          my reasoning...over 30 years ago for this assessment was simply we cannot continue to count on ss for retirement as it was not designed to be retirement...just to help and assist. included in fdr's "new deal" ss really was not intended to be used as a long term solution, most likely it shouldn't, for it's intention, exist today....but it most certainly does. most likely privatizing it will be the resolve...not that i agree or disagree with that.

          there are many pro and cons in relation to this topic and it may indeed and does many times get heated...while looking back in retrospect, i know now...or perhaps, think now, that just as the banks were baled out....which i so hated, but understand we could not watch the repercussions of a possible worldwide economic down fall, it will be the same a social security.

          the government is in too deep now to let it just go broke...they will have to bale it out, just as it did the banks and auto industries.
          8/4/2008 MAKE SURE AND VISIT Tobee's Blogs! http://www.bkforum.com/blog.php?32727-tobee43 and all are welcome to bk forum's Florida State Questions and Answers on BK http://www.bkforum.com/group.php?groupid=9

          Comment


            #6
            The problem is that the baby boomers have not saved enough for retirement. SS was definitely figured in as part of their retirement plan as a collective generation, so they will keep voting for social security. I think the age that people are eligible will keep going up, and at some point there will be a minimal means test of some sort. I also agree with banca rotta, that as the dollar's value decreases, and we print more money to pay off our debts as a country, that ss benefits will not keep up, and it will be harder to live on a social security pension.
            You can't take a picture of this. It's already gone. ~~Nate, Six Feet Under

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by backtoschool View Post
              The problem is that the baby boomers have not saved enough for retirement. SS was definitely figured in as part of their retirement plan as a collective generation, so they will keep voting for social security. I think the age that people are eligible will keep going up, and at some point there will be a minimal means test of some sort. I also agree with banca rotta, that as the dollar's value decreases, and we print more money to pay off our debts as a country, that ss benefits will not keep up, and it will be harder to live on a social security pension.
              exactly...!!! ....we were extremely SAVING POOR our entire life...smart me...i thought i had it all figured out.....NOT!!!!!!

              not getting really personal but i will...we counted on investments, pensions, 401's, ira's and NOT ss...however....our investments tanked...and they were supposed to have been a LARGE part of our retirement...on top of that we drew out every dime of one the big 401 to live on...making that go down the drain...)i'm SOOOOOOOo pissed i did that...and i have to take blame where i missed up...but i did). so with the best intentions i thought we would be find...OH...and let's not forget the house we purchased 33 years ago...for 35,000 was now worth well over $650k...and we were going to sell that and sail into the sunset...JOKES ON ME!!!

              so now...here we are on ss and a pension.. certainly NOT where i thought we would be.....
              8/4/2008 MAKE SURE AND VISIT Tobee's Blogs! http://www.bkforum.com/blog.php?32727-tobee43 and all are welcome to bk forum's Florida State Questions and Answers on BK http://www.bkforum.com/group.php?groupid=9

              Comment


                #8
                The big change as to all this occurred in the mid-1980's when the 401(k) plan came into existence and the older pension plans were phased out. Folks not used to having to figure out or save for retirement were handed brochures/information on what now to do with money they have to now contribute out of their paychecks and which would be matched in full or by certain percentages to their contribution into the plan. Most people had no clue what to do as previously all was done for them knowing they would have a pension in place from their employer on retirement and social security would be available. Many people were smart with their 401(k)s during the boom years of the 90's as to stocks and folks were retiring in their 40's and 50's on what they earned in savings and investments but those people were the ones able to save a lot of money. Those that could not save a lot (like 1% of their salary) were left way behind. Along with this came all the credit cards and home equity lines, etc., etc. and no one stopped to think what could or might occur and no planning measures put into place. It was a mix waiting to explode. And now those that could save somewhat lost lots of funds in their 401(k)s, had to live on whatever meager savings they had if they lost their jobs, etc. and now have to figure out how to keep their job long enough to make it to retirement age to survive. Otherwise if they are in bad financial straights, it is government assistance or move in with family.

                This entire mess started in the 1980s...those with foresight and planning and maybe having just the right contacts in the business world and income/cash to be able to do so got out while the getting was good.
                _________________________________________
                Filed 5 Year Chapter 13: April 2002
                Early Buy-Out: April 2006
                Discharge: August 2006

                "A credit card is a snake in your pocket"

                Comment


                  #9
                  I totally agree Flamingo. Most people are not saving enough, and the old pension system of previous generations is long gone unless you are a government employee or belong to a union. I think home equity lines of credit were one of the biggest problems in regards to retirement. People took cash out of their houses, equity that they built up for years, and spent it on consumable goods, leaving them with no equity and no nest egg.

                  And Tobee43, you will buy the house you are in and have a good retirement. In any case, we will all join you in Florida as we look for reasonable places to retire ourselves.
                  You can't take a picture of this. It's already gone. ~~Nate, Six Feet Under

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by Flamingo View Post
                    The big change as to all this occurred in the mid-1980's when the 401(k) plan came into existence and the older pension plans were phased out. Folks not used to having to figure out or save for retirement were handed brochures/information on what now to do with money they have to now contribute out of their paychecks and which would be matched in full or by certain percentages to their contribution into the plan. Most people had no clue what to do as previously all was done for them knowing they would have a pension in place from their employer on retirement and social security would be available. Many people were smart with their 401(k)s during the boom years of the 90's as to stocks and folks were retiring in their 40's and 50's on what they earned in savings and investments but those people were the ones able to save a lot of money. Those that could not save a lot (like 1% of their salary) were left way behind. Along with this came all the credit cards and home equity lines, etc., etc. and no one stopped to think what could or might occur and no planning measures put into place. It was a mix waiting to explode. And now those that could save somewhat lost lots of funds in their 401(k)s, had to live on whatever meager savings they had if they lost their jobs, etc. and now have to figure out how to keep their job long enough to make it to retirement age to survive. Otherwise if they are in bad financial straights, it is government assistance or move in with family.

                    This entire mess started in the 1980s...those with foresight and planning and maybe having just the right contacts in the business world and income/cash to be able to do so got out while the getting was good.
                    absolutely excellent perspective... and true to the bone.

                    actually...it hit us..well lets say this..one of us was just able to collect ss....and we are one of the most fortunate ones we know...with an excellent pension, medical insurance, drugs etc....we are truly blessed...we know that.

                    when we were really young we had a choice about our "old" type pension....what percentage to take out....i could barely make the mortgage but we took out max...it was just my training or brainwashing by my parents!! LOL!!! but now...it really has saved our lives for the better.

                    you hit the nail on the head in the 1980's handing these young people brochures, and having little or no financial sense whatsoever. shoot...i made my kids both 17 at the time in college have their own checking accounts and pay their own bills...both, and i have one daughter and one son...are the CEO's of their families and have survived this economy, i can proudly say much better than their old parents who both lost their jobs. none the less, i'm extremely proud of both of them for never using credit cards unless they paid them in full...etc. one purchased their first home at 21...the other at 24...so it's always a parent's dream to have smarter kids then themselves!! LOL!!!

                    thanks for the great insightful post...
                    8/4/2008 MAKE SURE AND VISIT Tobee's Blogs! http://www.bkforum.com/blog.php?32727-tobee43 and all are welcome to bk forum's Florida State Questions and Answers on BK http://www.bkforum.com/group.php?groupid=9

                    Comment

                    bottom Ad Widget

                    Collapse
                    Working...
                    X