Social Security: A Retirement Plan for People Who Don't Have One

The headline says you can claim Social Security at 62 but you should wait. Compelling advice for someone who spent four decades not saving anything.

Here's the upside to waiting: you get more money per month. Here's the downside: you're older and closer to death. It's a real Sophie's choice between eating cat food at 62 or eating slightly better cat food at 67.

The article promises to teach you how to build the rest of your retirement income. The rest. As if Social Security is the foundation and you're just adding a few decorative flourishes on top. Sir, if Social Security is your financial foundation, you don't have a retirement plan. You have a government-sponsored delay of the inevitable.

Financial advisors love this topic because it lets them pretend they're helping people who maxed out their 401(k)s decide between optimal claiming strategies. In reality, they're explaining to a 61-year-old Applebee's server whether she should take $1,200 a month now or $1,680 a month later while she works five more years.

The math says waiting is better. The math also said you should have started investing in your twenties. The math has been talking for forty years and nobody listened then either.

Build the rest of your retirement income. What does that even mean? You're 62. You're not building anything. You're scavenging. You're looking under couch cushions for dividend stocks.

The brutally honest version of this headline is: "You F*cked Up Decades Ago, Here's How to Minimize the Damage." But that doesn't get clicks from people who still think three years of delayed Social Security payments counts as a wealth management strategy.

Take it at 62, take it at 70, doesn't matter. You're still eating ramen, just with different inflation adjustments.

Photo by Sasun Bughdaryan on Unsplash