Should I Start Taking Social Security and Invest It?

Should I Start Taking Social Security and Invest It?
Nix the guesswork and scrolling. We’ll connect you with investment pros we trust: bit.ly/3kwqrhf
Listen to how ordinary people built extraordinary wealth-and how you can too. You’ll learn how millionaires live on less than they make, avoid debt, invest, are disciplined and responsible! Featuring hosts from the Ramsey Network: Dave Ramsey, Ken Coleman, Christy Wright, Rachel Cruze, and John Delony.
Ramsey Network (Subscribe Now!)
• The Ramsey Show (Highlights):
www.youtube.co...
• The Ramsey Show (Full Episodes): www.youtube.co...
• The Dr. John Delony Show: www.youtube.co...
• The Rachel Cruze Show: www.youtube.co...
• The Ken Coleman Show: www.youtube.co...
• The Christy Wright Show: www.youtube.co...
• EntreLeadership: www.youtube.co...

[@RamseyEverydayMillionaires]

Nix the guesswork and scrolling. We’ll connect you with investment pros we trust: bit.ly/3kwqrhf

[@RJRussoVids]

The problem is that when you start taking S.S. there are limits on your earned income. So if you take S.S. while you’re still working if you earn over a certain amount there is a penalty. So if the plan is to continue working AND take S.S. then you need to figure out how much of the benefit will be lost as a result of being over the income limit.

[@ritamerringer2173]

Learned something new today I hadn’t really thought about! Thank you to Dave and team for keeping us informed and specifically to brother Dave for his in your face comments that makes me actually hear what he’s saying! Merry Christmas to you all! Peace and prosperity in the new year 🎉

[@MegaReception1]

I have my own business and I get ss since 62 and live of my salary and now save 100% of my ss plus what I normally save it's growing a lot faster. But it's discipline and you'll reach your goal.

[@neilmettheworld]

This is well it depends. Depending on your situation your social security won’t be tax or at least a certain percentage won’t be taxed. Assuming that you left the work force, you won’t have access to a Roth or deferred retirement account so it would be an investment account subject to capital gains. Whatever makes you feel smart…

[@sand8291]

Dave love the mute button. He didn’t have to hit he button while the caller was talking

[@MsChristianr]

"Magical government math"😂😂😭😭So true. They will throw in your face thats it's supplemental but they condition you to livr on it. I made that decision to get out of their evil confused cycle

[@tracywalker244]

How did you get out of the cycle??

[@MsChristianr]

@@tracywalker244 a decision. I'm documenting it on my channel

[@SantaBarbaraAlberto]

Understand and admire Dave. Agree with his message about debt wholeheartedly. For us, we chose to defer to FRA for several reasons, including inflation adjustment, age difference with my spouse, and taxation. Since it is unavoidable and the merits are not at issue, deferring to FRA made the most sense for us.

[@lkj0822g]

If you want to get your blood pressure to a boiling point, download your social security withholdings as well as the S&P 500 annual returns for the same period. Dump it all on a spreadsheet and calculate the balance you would have if you were able to take those withholdings and invest. Then, if you haven't thrown a brick through your computer monitor, compare to your cumulative social security payment to age 80 or so.

[@Mosesusorer]

Haven’t done the math but I can tell you someone’s getting strangled if I looked at them side by side

[@harrychu650]

Ramsey is correct. The other option is to wait until age 70 to withdrawal SS, an age that government actuaries have mathematically determined will minimize the amount the trust fund has to pay out before you die.

[@ridenorthwest1687]

Till you realize the government is out of money for social security and SS will be gone soon.

[@mattcollins4550]

This is what happens when the government runs the schools... and what happens when the government runs the pension program.

[@MaryLopez-em3rc]

If it weren’t for the government social security pension program millions of seniors would be homeless and starving and have no health insurance. Those lucky enough to have old federal civil service pensions have big pensions.

[@mattcollins4550]

@@MaryLopez-em3rc ha ha ha no. If people were allowed to keep their own money they could invest it and make many many many times more than what the government gives back to them.

[@Oldtimeleftie]

Hey Dave wanna comment on the percentage of Senior Citizens that lived in extreme poverty prior to Social Security?

[@whatsup3270]

That is wrong simply wrong, practically all of it is wrong. btw most people get out more than they put in. To get more out than you put in 1) if you retire FRA or earlier live to age 80 and you are ahead. 2) retire at FRA and live 12 years, or 3) if you delay until age 70 you have to live to age 84 to get ahead

[@July.4.1776]

The problem with taking social security early is the vast majority will take it early and start living on it as an increased income / lifestyle. 🤔 This puts them in a spot when they leave employment where they have to decrease their lifestyle due to the decreased income. 😬 I agree with Dave if your going to save or invest 100% of it……. If your not going to save and invest do not take it to supplement your income if you have no other retirement income.

[@jamesripton7120]

Wealthy people take SS at 70. Poor people take it at 62. Be smart. Do what wealthy people do.

[@nala3038]

@@jamesripton7120everybody’s situation is different, there is no one size that fits all. Your comment is pure insanity.

[@jamesripton7120]

@@nala3038 If you are financially desperate it makes sense to start SS at 62. If you were successful and saved money, by delaying you will earn 8%, plus inflation on a tax deferred basis. Same goes for RMD's. Wealthy people wait until 72, poor people take distributions earlier.

[@kenpachithe3rd185]

The guy never had a chance to ask his question ..

[@gaiusgracchus7475]

What would be the minimum interest rate of return need to be on the early payouts be for this to be true? This would also have to take into consideration that the Social Security payouts are taxed at a maximum of 85% whereas the investment returns probably would be taxed at 100%...

[@jimmyjo7558]

For most persons that live paycheck to paycheck, SS is the only retirement that they have. They would starve during retirement if they didn’t have it.

[@July.4.1776]

A great plan is to live off your investment income while letting your SS build if your already at FRA this will guarantee an 8% return till age 70. If you have provisional income above the limits you may avoid having to pay that tax on your SS by reducing your income from your investments at age 70.

[@jasonpatrickries]

Na, your social security dies with you. Take it because you'll get nothing if you decide to wait until 70 but die at 69. If you would have taken it and invested it at least you can pass it to an heir if you die.

[@harryl7946]

If I continue to work, I earn too much to get SS income. So I work and invest and keep my head down. Out of debt with a well paying career makes one secure. Just hope and pray 🙏🏼 natural disasters stay away.

[@jeremiahmeade710]

Also hope and pray that social security is abolished.

[@Teamshmo]

Lol magical government math

[@mikeshaw4610]

WhT about the extra taxes you have to pay by taking social security while still working?

[@anitaoakley6122]

Invest it where? Everytime I invested money I lost a lot of money

[@CalmerThanYouAre1]

If you're on baby step 7, you're likely going to pay heavy taxes on your SS payments due to the impact of your investment income on the tax calculation of your SS payments. Deferring will give you tax-free growth and a guaranteed rate of return from delayed earnings credits. If you're healthy, stand a good chance of living past 80 and don't need the money, consider deferring for at least a few years, especially if drawing down 401Ks, IRAs or other pre-tax qualified retirement accounts where distributions are counted 100% as "earned income" for tax purposes.

[@July.4.1776]

Thomas P …… You are correct.

[@StoneyAngel]

But it’s not the government taking care of you it’s people getting paid their money back and people are irresponsible so this program Has to continue cause the alternative is worse.

[@jeremiahmeade710]

I read that you can apply for religious exemption from social security, but your religious organization has to be able to take care of you in your latter years. I think that the best version of such an organization would be one which greatly augmented financial literacy among its people as often as possible so that at least the vast majority would never require financial assistance. That way social security would be absolutely obsolete, like it is now, but, then it would be powerless to rob wage earners as well: music to my ears.

[@jericho3774]

why not take ss at 62 and take less out of my 403b and let that gain interest?

[@jameswitte5676]

How’s everyone doing by filing early and investing their social security benefit so far this year? I feel sorry for anyone who follows your advice.

[@jamesripton7120]

Wealthy people take SS at 70. Poor people take it at 62. Be smart. Do what wealthy people do.

[@rhscnative]

Your hating on Social Security assumes that people would actually invest that money all of their working lives. If people were that good with money - you wouldn't have a job. it's really not a bad program. It forces people to save for retirement which for perhaps most people is the only way they are going to do it.

[@MaryLopez-em3rc]

If you would have taken your social security early in 2021 and invested the checks in the stock market you lost a huge chunk of it.

[@kevin-mi9tl]

You be up a lot if you both bought every month. Stock market is at an all time high

[@damondiehl5637]

Market downturns are buying opportunities. Some of the stocks I bought in March, April and May of 2020 have quadrupled.

[@TenraiGudo]

Can we take a lump sum of our social security?!

[@nala3038]

No

[@justjkid4892]

Social Security gets transferred to a surviving spouse or child with special needs if you die, it doesnt just "go away" lol

[@brandonk1097]

The surviving spouse only gets the SS of their deceased spouse or their own, whichever is higher. They don’t get both. So yes, it effectively goes away

[@jasonpatrickries]

Wrong, your social security dies with you. Take it and invest it so you can leave it to your spouse or whomever.

[@grantmarut7488]

😮

[@kaiman5307]

Where would you invest the social security money ?

[@kevin-mi9tl]

S&P 500. VOO etf

[@ThanhTLam1]

wait.. if social security is so bad, then why do we do it? wouldn't it be better if we just let the people keep their money?

[@dc76384]

Good idea...but it's not better for the government

[@megalodon1726]

Most people wouldn't invest the money, and then they'd be destitute in retirement and they'd vote for another government program to give them some money in retirement. If you get rid of Social Security you'd have to replace it with something else like mandatory 401k's, otherwise you'll end up with a generation of broke old people who will vote to restore Social Security.

[@July.4.1776]

The vast majority of retirees are living off social security.. It was and is designed to replace around 40% of your income.. The common misconception is that it was to replace your entire income which it never was intended to accomplish. They are our parents and grandparents that are past their working years and depend on the income. I have paid into the program for over 40 years it is not an entitlement.

[@July.4.1776]

You need to think of it like insurance. If you live all your life and never invest or save a dime at least you will have some income. Now with that being said you absolutely need to save and invest outside of social security for a well funded retirement..

[@July.4.1776]

@@megalodon1726 ….. You are 100% correct.

[@joemichaels1038]

Lol. Another horrible take Dave. I thought Dave didn't like risk? Social Security is approx an 8% a year increase from 62-70. Where can you a get a GUARANTEED 8% return every year!

[@FoodSmash]

Yeah but you could also die and never collect any SS benefits.

[@ponolovefarms3926]

Your kidding right?

[@guycoder]

And in Dave's world the market keeps going up by 10% a year with no downside....Personally I would take the guaranteed 8% + cost of living adjustments over investing in todays market and treat SS as market diversification. Yes, you are assuming you will live to 70 but for the majority it seems like a reasonable decision. But hey I guess you can take the SS early and hand it over to a SmartVester Pro :)

[@FrankS111]

The government LOOOOVES people like you. SS is NOT an annual 8% increase

[@joemichaels1038]

@@FrankS111 I'm not talking about COLA. You take approx 30% reduction if you file early (62) compared to your FRA which varies depending of the year you were born. If you wait to file until 70 it works out to approx 8% a year if you compare what you would get at age 62 compared to 70.

[@Krynale]

Somehow Dave doesn't complain about the Millitary budget....yeah THAT program is just fine, I bet!

[@JDawgstwothousand]

What's that got to do with Personal Finance? You just got offended for something that he hasn't even commented on.

[@James-yi1vk]

@@JDawgstwothousand it has to do with personal finance when the mitary budget of 700+ billion dollars is shouldered by the American tax payer. It directly effects personal finance.

[@JDawgstwothousand]

@@James-yi1vk so you're saying if the military budget was cut to 500 billion your personal net worth would be 33% greater? Or are you just punching at air?

[@James-yi1vk]

@@JDawgstwothousand hey there Capt. Oversimplification. Your analogy fails so hard that it's a non-sequetor. Please re-read my post. If the government spends less, then they need less taxes. If they need less taxes, that means that tax payers can keep more of their own money. Stop trying to distort perspectives to prove a point that doesn't need to be proved. It makes you look very dishonest, even if your intentions are pure.

[@JDawgstwothousand]

@@James-yi1vk your view only considers what is being taken out by the military as it relates to taxes. You are not considering the 1.5 million Men and Women it directly employs. Also consider the manufacturing jobs for all of this equipment. All of these people pay taxes and do things like eat, sleep and go on vacation. Finally the military provides an education for millions from all walks of life.