Favorite team:
Location:Between sanity and madness
Biography:Been there, done that, became jaded, am cynical
Interests:
Occupation:Adventurer
Number of Posts:95423
Registered on:12/16/2006
Online Status:Not Online

Recent Posts

Message
quote:

What these advisors fail to factor in is at 62 you are or should be faily healthy and can enjoy retirement for at least 10+ yrs. Once you get to your late 70s and up you're not buying new toys or traveling the country. And even if you're healthy you could have a stroke, get cancer or dementia. I'm taking my at 62 and enjoying what life I have left.


Meh. I don't think that's what they're saying at all. It's about structuring what you have available the most efficient way. If the decision is made to retire at 62, you might have a small pension. You might have some rental property income. You might have a 401k, IRA, etc. Adjusting the flow from those various buckets/sources of income might get you closer to FRA or beyond and your total income (based on your projected longevity) might be better if you do it A versus B versus C.

No one is telling you cats to not take it at 62. When you're 84 or whatever, you might have wished you waited. It shouldn't be reflexive. It should make sense in a rational, mathematical way.

re: Social Security at age 62

Posted by Ace Midnight on 4/17/26 at 8:07 am to
quote:

I will be taking SS early but I also have 14 rentals that will be owned free and clear by that time


So, again, the key question is - do you need the income from SS or not? Because, if you don't, it is still probably smarter to wait until at least FRA, unless your longevity prospects are weaker than average.
Not sure it is 100 million.

Certain it is way over 10 to 11 million, though. My best guess is 35 or so.

Or about 1 out of 10 folks in the nation right now.

#Toomany
quote:


Pretty sure there’s still a Frostop on Airline in LaPlace.


Now, I was there a lot, back in the day. And the (at the time recently restored for filming scenes for Monster's Ball) Airline Motors which was not too far from there (and I guess it is now closed.)

quote:

Always sketch people around the parking lot.


True story, funny story, the only time I was ever there, one of, if not, the wealthiest individual I knew personally just randomly showed up.

re: Social Security at age 62

Posted by Ace Midnight on 4/16/26 at 11:04 am to
quote:

Yea, a roughly "guaranteed" 8% increase in your 60's isn't too shabby if you don't need the funds.


And it's permanent with some inflation protection. Of course, there will be a fix required for the older Gen X folks, but other than that waiting appears to be a "no brainer" UNLESS YOU NEED THE INCOME.

Obviously, if you need the income, you're not investing it at 4% compounding.
The squids give out medals for time in the barrel, though, so there's all of that.














(I keed, I keed.)

re: Social Security at age 62

Posted by Ace Midnight on 4/16/26 at 10:30 am to
quote:


I'm not entirely following the logic, is it assuming you are continuing to work and don't actually need the SS checks for income at that time, so you invest all of it?


The logic is messed up because every situation is different. If you're still working, it is more likely you should wait.

The "claim early and invest" strategy just doesn't make sense. You can't work over a certain amount. So, you either have to have a pension and bridge the gap with investments which you are taking out of the market to put your SS back in if you claimed early? #Nonsense

Unless it is speaking to folks who work off the books (which is, obviously, tax/SS fraud).
quote:

and isn't Colbert being laid off in a few months?


Yeah, but he's got a great gig on that new Star Trek show.

:rolleyes:
quote:

For 2 blocks


That's more than enough of New Orleans, IMHO. Memphis and Jackson are trying to compete with New Orleans for Worst City in the South(tm) honors.
quote:

Thermaltake has one for about $55 regular price.


I think you're likely to have a bunch more options in the $50 to $80 range than at $40.

re: WYHI - Super Tall Girl

Posted by Ace Midnight on 4/15/26 at 2:32 pm to
Outrageously tall/large people are generally not of good health. "Normal" size ranges are just that for a reason.

Sandy Allen (RIP) is the tallest verified American woman ever (Ella Ewing alleged 8'4" and was estimated by Guinness to have been measured 7'4" may have topped 8 feet - unconfirmed, Sandy Allen was verified at 7' 7")



She was over 5' tall before her 4th birthday. Died in her early 50s.


Zeng Jinlian has a good chance to have been one of the tallest women who has ever lived - verified 8'1", died at 17.

re: WYHI - Super Tall Girl

Posted by Ace Midnight on 4/15/26 at 2:22 pm to
Well, if we're going to WYHI AI girls, they don't have to be so unrealistic as to not allow for suspension of belief, right?
quote:

I take back anything negative I’ve said about TMZ


I mean, they're likely to at least try to go where the stories are, but Harvey is to the left of AOC.

#Reallyleft
quote:

I only want to spend $40 on a case.


*checks calendar*

Okay. Good luck.
quote:

Trying to find a nice case (features wise) but no LED and I really dont want a side window.


You can configure a Meshify 2 dark, without a window if you're okay with black.

I had to do the same search last year.