Why I Started Collecting Social Security Now Instead Of Waiting Until 70

Summary

• There are three prime ages someone might pick to start collecting their Social Security: 62, the soonest age; Full Retirement Age (66,2mo - 67), or 70, the last starting age.
• This article will briefly review the most common reasons that Seeking Alpha writers and readers have stated to explain why which starting age makes the most sense.
• I will then go through our personal situation that explains why now and not when I turn 70 and would get the largest payout.
• The article closes with deciding when to start your Social Security could influence your portfolio strategy.

courtneyk/E+ via Getty Images

Introduction

One of the most discussed topics on Seeking Alpha and many retirement sites is "When do I start drawing my Social Security?". It seems everyone has their opinion and many don't take kindly to those who disagree. Unlike those theoretical articles on Social Security, I will use my actual situation and amounts that my wife and I will be receiving. At the end, I will briefly discuss how this will influence our investment decisions.

In a moment, I will list some of the reasons for the most discussed starting ages: 62, the soonest age; Full Retirement Age (66,2mo - 67), or 70, the last starting age.

Source: ssa.gov

A vast majority of both sexes start the year they become eligible; very few wait to the last age allowed. The second biggest choice is one's FRA. Social Security provides the majority of income for most retired Americans. For about 50% of seniors, it provides at least 50 percent of their income, and for about 25% of seniors, it provides at least 90 percent of income.

Did you know not everyone gets the same benefit per dollar earned? Social Security pays lower-wage worker more per-dollar earned than those paying the maximum amount of SS taxes each year.

Source: www.cbpp.org

Common reasons given as "best time" to start

Before I start listing reasons, if one takes "best time" to start literally, you have a 1-in-97 chance of being right, as that is the number of months you have to pick from as your starting point. If a couple both want to start at the optimal age, the odds are 1-in-9409. And of course, you will never know if you made the optimal choice as that is not known until you are both in that pine box (which SS gives $256 toward but only to a surviving spouse!). It is my understanding that the Social Security payouts are designed to all generate the same amount of income at the life-expectancy age, or about 78. The reason for the debate and Social Security calculators saying otherwise is the assumptions the SSA uses in their calculations.

Possible reasons to start before your FRA

• You need money to live on. There is probably no better reason.
• You are in poor health and/or your family tree has a history of dying before 78. This would right up there with reason #1.
• You want to travel and doing that now rather than later has advantages like mobility and unexpected life events.
• When you enroll in Medicare. There are Medicare premium benefits like the "Hold Harmless" rule that only apply when Social Security deducts your Part B premium from your check.
• You rather spend the government's "money" than dip into your retirement nest egg.
• You have proven you can earn more than the "delayed credits" provide plus any Social Security COLA increases. Actually, earning less affects the break-even age.
• You are single and no one benefits from waiting for you to collect a larger Social Security check.
• Several of the above reasons flow into this one: The money is in your hands, not the governments. This covers both the concern future Social Security benefits will be cut or you are not around to collect (a possibility).
• You have a COLA-protected pension so maxing out another COLA income stream not critical.

Possible reasons to start at your FRA

• Your spouse gets a nice bump in their SS check. Before 2017, you could "File & Suspend", allowing your spouse collect while your benefit continued to grow.
• The penalty for starting early is gone. If you expect to draw off your spouse's Social Security when they start, you are starting before the FRA reduces your spousal benefit by the same percent as your check was reduced.

Possible reasons to wait to the last minute: age 70

• You are single and do not have a pension or large retirement nest egg.
• You do not need the money to live on and believe the built-in Social Security increases provide better "return" than you can earn.
• You are in good health and come from a family with lots of people who lived past 78, maybe into their 90s.
• You are married, have the higher Social Security check and the only pension. When you pass, the smaller Social Security check stops and unless you accepted a reduced pension, that income source could be greatly reduced or gone, depending on what you signed up for at retirement.

Is Social Security going broke?

Each year, the Social Security Trustees must file a report on the financial strength of the Trust Fund. Investment News reviewed the report for its readers (link). If Congress does nothing, current payroll taxes will only cover about 75% of projected benefits in 2034, the date the fund dries up. Not surprisingly, people who focus on that data tend to start collecting sooner than others (link).

Is there help out there for when to start?

Yes: even the Social Security site has a link that compares some popular free online Social Security Calculators. There are also sites that offer calculators for a fee. I chose not to list those as it could appear as endorsing some. These are easily found by googling "social security calculators". I was not impressed by any of the free ones I tried; too many limitations, especially if married and one spouse had already started collecting. Remember, if the calculator doesn't ask enough questions to fit your situation, take the answer with that proverbial "grain of salt"!

The math behind why I started now

My FRA was July 2021. I picked September to start (first check October) and it fit into our IRA-to-Roth conversion plans and limiting 2021 to three months of enhanced Social Security income kept us under what I estimate the first IRMMA limit will be for 2021 income. To place us into perspective with the reasons above, here is where we are:

• This raises our guaranteed income above our expenses so now we do not need to use our retirement nest egg to live on.
• Except for the parent that died of breast cancer, the others all lived into their 90s.
• My wife is three years older and suffers from several medical conditions that most likely will prevent her from reaching 80, thus we had her start drawing one year early. If she dies first, I will be fine as I have the much bigger SS check and have a pension (non COLA).
• If I go first, her guaranteed income will drop by slightly over 50%. If I pass before 2039 (making her 87), my $250k Term policy pays off, which offsets the income loss for 5-7 years.

Assumptions made or facts used for my SS starting date decision

• My first SS check will be $3066. I estimate my check in May 2025, when I turn 70, would be 30% bigger, or $3986, not counting COLA increases. My wife's SS check would be the same as it doesn't increase if I delay beyond my FRA. That said, my starting bumps here check from $1100 to $1560.
• Calculations allowed for an inflation factor to be used. I tested 0%, 2% and 5% inflation rates.
• I assumed all of this would be taxed at our marginal rate, a very pessimistic assumption. Also ran tests using no taxes.
• Ran multiple scenarios, assuming we spent none of the money from SS and we could earn 0%, 2.5% or 5% on what we then invested. Above 5% pushed most of the break-even ages to the century mark for me.

Author's note: The numbers inside each table represent the month/year when starting at 70 matched the results of when we both really started.

The Results

ROI	0% Tax	22% tax
0.0%	12/38	12/38
2.5%	1/43	1/42
5.0%	>5/51	7/47

Click to enlarge

Table #1 assumed no inflation. The 0% ROI provides the results for a couple who spends all the SS checks. The very realistic 5% ROI/20% tax bite translates into my wife being 95 and me being 92 as break-even ages.

ROI	0% Tax	22% tax
0.0%	7/37	11/41
2.5%	7/41	11/46
5.0%	7/45	>5/51

Click to enlarge

Table #2 assumed a more realistic 2% inflation. Here the results were very interesting. In the 0% tax world, the break-even period shortened (vs. 0% inflation) while the 20% tax-rate results showed just the opposite. A 7% ROI would result in us never reaching the break-even as the accumulated difference was still growing.

What if tests

Since my wife is older and has multiple health issues that she has been told limit the probability of a normal life span, I ran two more scenarios using 5% ROI/20% tax/2% inflation. If she lives to only 75, my break-even age is 89, not my late 90s. If she lives to 80, I can live to 94 before the Social Security decisions we made are "wrong".

I ran another set of tests using 2-5% inflation and one thing never changed: our combined SS checks if we waited until I was 70 would have been more by around $1000/month, though my wife's check actually would be smaller. At 2% inflation, 5% ROI and 20% taxed, starting when we did saved us from spending down our other assets by almost $140,000. That amount and the earnings on it, offset the SS check shortfall starting when I turn 70 and why long lifespans should still result in starting at my FRA was better than waiting.

Portfolio Strategy

Setting your Social Security starting date(s) sooner so you do not have to dip into the investments you made to support your retirement would allow you to use a more aggressive equity allocation strategy possibly than another investor who has to pull out income or sell shares monthly to cover their expenses. Likewise, the allocation in Fixed Income assets could be less aggressive in terms of interest-rate or default risks as shorter-duration, Investment-grade bonds, plus dividends, could meet their cash-flow needs.

Of course, the more you use Uncle Sam's money, the more will be left in your estate to give to charity and family in your will or trust.

How collecting SS now affects our investing

I mentioned earlier that by starting now, we go from a cash flow deficit to being positive. This will have no effect on how we invest our IRAs accounts as if things stay as they are, we should not have to take more out than is required by law. The real change is going more to growth, less income in our taxable brokerage accounts. We will move from taking interest-rate risks to taking on more equity-movement risk since we won't (hopefully) have to sell when the market is down. Dividends will replace some bond income, which will lower the tax bite.

Considering your SS income as Long-term CD

While unlike a CD is the fact the "principle" could end upon your death, the cash flow is guaranteed (ignoring the unlikely 2034 cut) as it would be with a bank CD. One strategy is to replace other, more risky Fixed Income assets with your "SS CD". According to SSA, the average retired worker receives $1555/month, or a little less than $19,000 per year. Let's say you are replacing 5%-yielding FI assets, that means your SS check equates to about $380,000 in assets. If your Nest Egg is worth $1mm and you maintain a 60/40 EQ/FI allocation, you could move $228k into stocks from bonds and still have your new 60/40 allocation. Historically, this should increase your CAGR.

Final thoughts

Until Congress "fixes" Social Security, people will be rightly concerned about when the SS Trust Fund goes "broke". Many don't see Congress letting that happen and many solutions exist. One simple one is using other tax revenue to pay the benefits. Here is a link to 20 commonly discussed solutions.

When to start collecting Social Security is a very individualized decision as there are factors, in combination, that make us unique. Add in a spouse and that could double the factors involved. Despite the hours spent crunching "the numbers", for most of those reading this article, there is no "wrong time" to start as much as there is no "perfect time" to start.

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have no stock, option or similar derivative position in any of the companies mentioned, and no plans to initiate any such positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Comments

[Retired Investor]

What fun with SSA. My delayed credits were not properly included with my 2/22 check. It took numerous calls and two appeals to finally see my check in August! One SS rep asked if the credits applied to my SS or MC (for which there is no such thing!). Highly suggest you print out your online SS statement before applying so you have a reference point; once you apply, SSA removes all estimates.

[User 50077887]

@Retired Investor On the subject of SS, this household is very much looking forward to the first of the year. Because of one off year where we had a large (large for this household) reportable income, we’ve been paying double Medicare premiums this year. That’s $340/mo extra we will see next year in our benefit. Medicare has already indicated there will be no premium increase next year. Then there’s the adjustment for inflation. Looking like it will be around $360/mo. That’s $700/mo more heading for the checking account beginning in January.

[Retired Investor]

@SeattleKraken Sometimes we cannot avoid that MC premium bump but its nice when its a one-off event that caused it.

[Retired Investor]

I recently covered the Bridge Strategy, the idea of tapping other accounts instead to delay starting SS. My review wasn’t positive on the strategy. seekingalpha.com/...

[Rick Patterson]

@Retired Investor
What book would you (or anyone) recommend to come up to speed on SS nuances and planning?

[Retired Investor]

@Moroni 10.4 I see this lady mentioned often: Mary Beth Franklin

www.youtube.com/...

I would google Ed Slott as possible source. Libraries should have copies of most.

[Rick Patterson]

@Retired Investor
Thank you, she sounds good. I'll check Ed Slott out also.

[KhunLarry]

@Retired Investor Listened to MB Franklin video. Just a bag of hot air. No solid info

[CTYankee1620]

@Retired Investor - I enjoyed the article and the discussion. Sharing your personal situation helps put the issue into perspective. The most important takeaway to this is that it is a personal decision and one size does not fit all. Great analysis of the variables involved.

[Retired Investor]

@CTYankee1620 You are absolutely right, each person’s situation is different. Glad you liked it. I have to wait to 2022 to see my FRA-delay boost as apparently they only apply them in January.

[Retired Investor]

2022 to see 5.9% increase. www.investmentnews.com/...

[bionic1]

@Retired Investor Probably raise part B 5.8%

[Retired Investor]

@bionic1 Current estimate is $10, from $148 to $158. Nor sure when the final number will be told.

[User 50077887]

@Retired Investor I saw that this morning within an hour of the CPI release. It’ll help offset our having to pay double the Medicare premium for a year next year.

[hdh12]

Assuming only positive returns in your analysis understates the risks of taking SS early.

[Retired Investor]

@hdh12 I did assume 0% returns and considering history assuming long-term negative return would be unrealistic, IMO. Next time on my PC, I will run -2%.

[hdh12]

@Retired Investor I hope you are right but I can see a decade of poor returns is not beyond the possibilities.

[Retired Investor]

@hdh12 I agree the next decade could be poor but many retirees will be in that mode for over 20 years, and no 20-yr period has shown a negative return; only 6% of 10-yr periods were negative. www.businessinsider.com/...

[tombohl54]

I am asked all the time when someone should start SS. Not to be a smart aleck, my answer is tell me when you are going to die and I’ll tell you when to start taking it. Beyond that it’s a guess based on your personal circumstances- primarily health and what your full financial picture looks like

[Retired Investor]

@tombohl54 While humorous, as I said only then do you know if you made the best decision. The key is thinking it through.

[Make good choices]

@tombohl54 I also tell people to take into consideration the value of the dollar today vs what the value of the dollar will be, when you reach FRA, or age 70. The checks you receive at age 70 will have less buying power. How much less is anybody's guess, but it will be less.
Receiving 96 SS checks, (with annual raises) from age 62 to age 70 gives you a great head start to invest that money if you continue to work, or have other sources of income, and don't need the SS checks for monthly living expenses. Just a few more things to take into consideration when deciding.

[Retired Investor]

@Make good choices My analysis took this into considering (investing SS checks) and and in my case, it said start at my FRA.

[Make good choices]

I turned 66 in Oct 2017. I started taking SS early, in Feb 2017 while I was still working full time at a blue collar job. I did not need the money and was able to bank all of my SS checks each month.

Fast forward to March 2020 and the economy was slammed with shut downs. My employer informed me that they had lost 70% of their business and there wouldn't be enough work for me.
All the money I saved up since Feb 2017, from banking my SS checks, was the seed money to open a taxable trading account.

I officially retired from my blue collar job, and started selling cash secured puts and covered calls in June 2020 and have earned amazing returns. I have almost doubled my portfolio since then.

The difference between SS checks received early, and what I could have collected if I had waited to 66, or even 70, now seems like peanuts compared to what I am earning each month in my trading account.

Soo glad I started collecting SS early, when I didn't need it. It prepared me with the seed money to start trading when I retired in June 2020.

[Delivery boy]

@Make good choices - So let me get this straight. You take your social security benefit early while you are still working full-time, presumably resulting in tax consequences on those sums. And instead of investing the social security money then while you were fully employed, probably the most safe time to do so with this strategy, you let it sit in a savings account and then risk it all with an option trading account when you get fired from your job. Yeah, that sounds like a great plan!

[Retired Investor]

@Make good choices Thanks for sharing. Like the old Dragnet show said, “there are millions of stories” or something like that,

[User 50077887]

@Delivery boy The tax consequences would depend on how much he was making working full time. Since he was in a wage earning status in the year he reached FRA, he was allowed to make $44,880 between February and October without having any of his social security benefit reduced. Anything in the months after FRA don’t count against him. The only penalty would be that he’s going to pay taxes on up to 85% of his benefit. That’s my recollection.

[Marrk]

Good article. Thank you.

[Retired Investor]

@Marrk Glad you found it helpful.

[MyPrivilegeIsShowing]

“From each according to his ability. To each according to his needs.” When people used to say that, they were criticized for being socialists. Now they are congratulated.

In the past, the Social Security fix included raising the tax rate and raising the retirement age. Since they can now fund Social Security by sticking it to the rich, that is what will happen. Means test it so that people who paid in for 40 years receive nothing. That’s the reward we receive for being successful and deferring gratification as well as saving as much as we could for retirement

Tax rates will not go up and the retirement age will not increase.

Stick it to the rich

[Retired Investor]

@MyPrivilegeIsShowing There is already a maximum payout and high-earners get less per dollar than low-wager earners. I see that trend continuing but not outright elimination over a set income level. Much easier to implement, IMO.

[Chris74]

I was a financial adviser for 25 years and this topic was a very common one. Your information was very good, and reasonable. The comments are interesting, and point out what you said: There is no perfect answer. In general, many people fail to be honest with themselves and admit they may not live to be very old. Or they will have mobility issues and the money will be used for fancier nursing homes and walkers. So for the overly thrifty, my advice was to spend some. To the spenders, my advice was to save some. One comment regarded both collecting at 70. This works, but for two people with high incomes, or similar contribution records consider this: I recommend the older spouse wait until the younger one is at FRA, then, older one collects and gets a bigger check (say "he" is 68) and will get that plus inflation bumps. The younger spouse takes a spousal benefit of 1/2 the FRA of the older spouse. Now that younger person can collect "her" full age 70 benefit say in 4 years, and get a significant raise. The benefit is that the couple will collect about 4 years of 1/2 the FRA benefit of the older spouse, making the wait much less painful than the both of them waiting till 70.
What I recommend everyone do that is approaching this exciting time is to read, read, read. Use the calculators, and use some other calculators to make sure you can afford to retire period. I almost always recommended against taking SS if you were still working and making enough to have to pay offset penalties on those earnings, and taxes. And when you are all done and ready, I did find that the people in SS office were generally very helpful. Like doctors, some are much better than others. Shop around and find one that you can understand and will explain things. Make an appointment.

[Retired Investor]

@Chris74 Thanks Chris. You raise an important point for the younger ones still working: Save for retirement as SS isn't enough to live on as your main/only source of income.

[bionic1]

@Retired Investor It never was mean to be,it was designed as a safety net NOT a substitute for a pension or other savings!!

[User 50077887]

@bionic1 But that’s not the way it’s viewed today. There are a lot of social policies that when initiated were meant to be something other than what they have grown to become. Social Security pays out in many ways that we’re never designed to be part of the program.

[newguy40]

Enjoyed your article and the thougthful comments and responses. Very helpful to this getting on 61YO.

[Retired Investor]

@newguy40 Glad you enjoyed and got something from it. The topic is well covered on SA.

[fully awake]

The government can be counted on to allow the insolvency to grow to an un- fixable crisis, as long as Democrats have any power. Their solution will be to steal more of your money and freedom. "Never let a good crisis go to waste" Right? Take SS as early as you can, while it's still there. As long as you live to 80 or so you've collected the same amount regardless of when you started receiving benefits.

[Retired Investor]

@fully awake I believe payments are designed to all even out around 78. My view is Congress will eventually fix SS, the question then is how and it’s effect on different people.

[glinsight]

Thank you. I’ve read many articles (and comments) on this subject, but none spelled out in this detail. I’m slightly past FRA now and leaning toward waiting to age 70 – but that’s not yet written in stone. My wife began collecting at her FRA and, when I start to collect, her check will go up but the difference is not as great as in your case.

Why am I waiting? You named a couple reasons but missed one big one. That is, SS is an insurance policy and, if congress does their job, a ‘sure thing’. Based on historical returns, investing all of my SS check would give me a better return than the increase in SS. But what if the economy tanks? What are the odds of my having serious regrets later?

All the calculators I’ve seen ultimately calculate how much you end up with, that is, the same goal is to die with the most money. That is certainly a nice-to-have, but IMHO the real goal should be to have the best odds of not running out. (In both casas I assume you’ll have sufficient for a comfortable and enjoyable retirement.)

[Retired Investor]

@glinsight Agree that SS is not getting cut due to lack of funds. I could see moving to CPI that generates smaller increases or higher earners get less COLA.

[bionic1]

@glinsight You haven't accounted for a non-financial events! Did you miss what's be going on the past 20+ months??

[glinsight]

@bionic1 I'm not sure what you mean. Please explain. I guess the event is the pandemic, but how should I have accounted for it?

[KingofKings]

One question. My wife is 2 years older than me and is 63 now. If she collects SS now, will it affect my larger SS payments, if I wait until FRA?

[Retired Investor]

@KingofKings If you are going to take a spousal benefit, her starting early doesn’t effect your benefit regardless of when you start. It does reduce what she would get as a spouse though.

[KingofKings]

@Retired Investor Thank you. I am still working and advising her to hold off until FRA.

[Retired Investor]

@KingofKings I should have mentioned this: If anyone hasn't setup their online SS account: don't wait. Besides seeing what your benefit could be now, at FRA and 70, it prevents someone else from setting one up and collecting under your SSN.

[billbam]

Very nice write up! As an Advisor, generally, generally speaking, I recommend taking SS when one stops working. Pretty annoying when one realizes they are paying taxes on the taxes they are expecting to be "paid" back to them. The general rule that would trump taking SS while still working, poor health.

Thanks, Bill

[User 50077887]

@billbam You can thank Joe Biden for paying “taxes on the taxes they are expecting to be paid back to them”. Senator Biden was the deciding vote to allow your social security benefit to be subject to federal income tax. It took a number of Senators votes of course but old Joe provided the decider.

[Retired Investor]

@billbam Thanks for reading. Health and Wealth will definitely effect when it’s “best” to start.

[hawkeyec]

@Retired Investor

My wife and I took our SS at 62 when we retired. Did so for several practical reasons. First, we each had a 403(b) with TIAA and when we retired (the driving choice here) we were required to take our retirement benefits in the form of annuities. Including early SS we covered our entire comfortable budget, leaving all our investment income as gravy which we were free to use any way we wanted. Even though I earned the max for 35 years and paid in self-employment tax on my gig work, our SS checks were less than they might have been. Mine would amount to around 25k per year except that because of our investment income, we both were required to hand back a total of $920/ month (total for two) to pay for Medicare premiums (over 10k/year). So my net as a widower now is $1600/mo and my wife's check has disappeared. Still, assuming I could have invested my net checks @5% for the last 15 years my early SS payments would have been worth $430,000 today, plus my wife's check the total would have been worth $700k. Besides, I reckon that if SS does curtail benefits there will a strong possibility current beneficiaries will be protected. I didn't want to risk that prospect by waiting and wasting $700k of investment capital to pay for the income I was going to receive.

[User 50077887]

@hawkeyec Smart moves.

[Retired Investor]

@hawkeyec Thanks for sharing your story.

[BroBill]

You forgot this potential fix:

www.investmentnews.com/...

[Retired Investor]

@BroBill Sounds somewhat like the private account solution that was suggested and greatly opposed by many different groups.

[User 50077887]

It appears you’re about a year older than myself. My wife is 6 mo older. I retired 4 years ago at 61 and took my social security at 62. My wife continued to work part time and this combination provided more than enough income for our expenses. We now head for a warmer climate for about 4-5 months every winter and my wife works a few days a month for the same employer as a summer float when we’re home. What a deal! She started taking social security at 65 about a year ago.

I started taking mine at 62 for many of the common reasons you listed. My thinking at the time was this:

I would rather spend the social security now than draw on the IRA’s. I can earn more on the IRA investments, providing a bigger withdrawal later than what the bump in the social security will provide.

Drawing on the IRA’s and delaying social security means you’re betting all your chips on the government. No thank you!

When you pass away, social security stops. If you spend your retirement savings first, your heirs could be left with nothing. Spending social security early means YOU have more control over your other retirement assets.

We wanted to enjoy the money and an active lifestyle while our health was good and we were young (a relative term, lol). We anticipate spending less( adjusted for inflation) as we age. Social Security is helping to fund our active lifestyle without spending down our own assets.

People with relatively little retirement savings or other sources of income are probably best off delaying social security as long as possible but if you have saved to enjoy your older years, what are you waiting for? There are no guarantees as to how many years you have left and remember…you can’t take it with you.

[Retired Investor]

@SeattleKraken Sounds like you thought this out well. Thanks for sharing.

[jvictor777]

@SeattleKraken
All good points; especially regarding IRA investments. Plan on doing the same.

[Retired Investor]

@SeattleKraken Strategically taking money from IRAs when you believe you are in a lower tax bracket than what you could be in at 72 is a wise move.

[Vandooman]

A few more considerations. First, there is no guarantee that social security may in time be means tested as a means of stretching it out. Second, there is no social security fund. In Canada the equivalent scheme is invested in third party securities and it has been tested to be good for 40 or 50 years out. In the US it amounts to a government promise to pay. There is no fund separate from the Government. Third, taxes may be higher in the future and you will receive less after tax to spend. Personally I have limited confidence in the competence of our government, regardless of party, so I took mine early.

[User 50077887]

@Vandooman Well said! Despite all the claims that we are the exceptional country in the world, I don’t have much faith in government. They spend like drunken sailors. At some point, we as a country, are in for a rude awakening. We’re fiscally arrogant.

[Retired Investor]

@Vandooman I fully expect SS to be means tested plus 100% taxable at some income level. Never believed in the “lock box” and what there is is government IOUs. I’m planning on higher rates and converting some IRA/401k assets today for that reason, but that is another hot topic.

[Retired Investor]

@SeattleKraken That reckoning will come sooner if the rest of the world drops the USD as its primary currency.