Are you rich?

[+ WilliamM]

It actually depends on the circumstances of the individual. Actually I may end up getting both SS and my pension because I started working at age 15 as a lifeguard and had regular social security jobs for basically the next 15 years. But ever since I started working in education, I have only been paying into the pension and not into social security. I am already vested in my pension so I am guaranteed some benefits.

 

There are some rules with taking social security benefits if you have a pension that may reduce or even eliminate social security benefits upon retirement. I am not super familiar with the exact rules. But I have gathered that like someone who started teaching right out of college at age say 22 and spent 40 years teaching and contributing to the pension would receive the pension benefits but not much or any social security even if they say worked through college at like McDonalds and contributed to social security for five years.

 

But someone in my situation who worked regular jobs for 15 years, spent 15 years teaching and then 15 years working a regular job again (assuming this is what I do) would receive both the pension and social security upon retirement.

 

Regardless, for the time one works in a pension-earning job, they are not paying into social security and instead are paying more per paycheck into a pension. So their take-home pay would be less during that time than someone working a more typical job that pays into social security. I believe this is how it generally works with employees with pensions, although I am not necessarily an expert on this. Certainly that is how it works with my job. There literally is no social security line on my paystub, just the money for my pension.

I am not a teacher. Worked in housing and Community Development for the city of Philadelphia. And paid into pension fund and social security for much longer than 18 years.

[+ sniper]

There are certain states where public employees with a pension don't pay into or receive Social Security(unless they accrue benefits from another job) but it's much less common today than it was 40 years ago. Also certain railroad workers have a similar arrangement.

[Beancounter]

It actually depends on the circumstances of the individual. Actually I may end up getting both SS and my pension because I started working at age 15 as a lifeguard and had regular social security jobs for basically the next 15 years. But ever since I started working in education, I have only been paying into the pension and not into social security. I am already vested in my pension so I am guaranteed some benefits.

 

There are some rules with taking social security benefits if you have a pension that may reduce or even eliminate social security benefits upon retirement. I am not super familiar with the exact rules. But I have gathered that like someone who started teaching right out of college at age say 22 and spent 40 years teaching and contributing to the pension would receive the pension benefits but not much or any social security even if they say worked through college at like McDonalds and contributed to social security for five years.

 

But someone in my situation who worked regular jobs for 15 years, spent 15 years teaching and then 15 years working a regular job again (assuming this is what I do) would receive both the pension and social security upon retirement.

 

Regardless, for the time one works in a pension-earning job, they are not paying into social security and instead are paying more per paycheck into a pension. So their take-home pay would be less during that time than someone working a more typical job that pays into social security. I believe this is how it generally works with employees with pensions, although I am not necessarily an expert on this. Certainly that is how it works with my job. There literally is no social security line on my paystub, just the money for my pension.

There is so much incorrect information in your post I don’t know where to start.....so I won’t.

[+ sniper]

It's true that some corporate pension formulas do some sort of offset for SS (e.g. 1.25% of final average monthly salary times number of years of service minus 0.5% of monthly SS benefit times number of years of service) but that's a reduction in the pension benefit, not a reduction in the SS benefit.

[+ Charlie]

I started teaching at 24, but my school had no pension plan. Instead, a requirement of my contract was that I pay a certain percentage of my salary into a TIAA-CREF retirement plan, and my employer would match my payment. I also paid Social Security. So when I retired after 36 years with the same employer, I annuitized much of the collected amount in TIAA, turned the rest into a regular retirement account, and started collecting Social Security at 63 (I also took a part-time consulting job until I was 75). It was a winning formula for me and for my employer, who didn't have to deal with a pension plan.

[+ keroscenefire]

There is so much incorrect information in your post I don’t know where to start.....so I won’t.

 

It's quite possible that I am over-generalizing from my experiences with my pension. Quite possibly other pension programs look pretty different. But the one we have in Colorado, PERA, is fairly accurate to the way it was explained to me by literally someone from PERA. And I definitely do not contribute to Social Security in my current job but do contribute to PERA instead. That is definitely accurate. But like I said, I am not pension expert.

 

Here is a website explaining these SS vs PERA (public workers pension in Colorado). I think it's pretty close to what I said.

[+ WilliamM]

I started teaching at 24, but my school had no pension plan. Instead, a requirement of my contract was that I pay a certain percentage of my salary into a TIAA-CREF retirement plan, and my employer would match my payment. I also paid Social Security. So when I retired after 36 years with the same employer, I annuitized much of the collected amount in TIAA, turned the rest into a regular retirement account, and started collecting Social Security at 63 (I also took a part-time consulting job until I was 75). It was a winning formula for me and for my employer, who didn't have to deal with a pension plan.

I also took part time consulting jobs for several years until my last boss cursed me for talking to the agencies that funded her operation.

[+ keroscenefire]

It's true that some corporate pension formulas do some sort of offset for SS (e.g. 1.25% of final average monthly salary times number of years of service minus 0.5% of monthly SS benefit times number of years of service) but that's a reduction in the pension benefit, not a reduction in the SS benefit.

 

Interestingly, I've understood it to be the opposite, that SS benefits could be lowered because of participation in a pension instead of a pension being lowered because of participation in SS. From the PERA web site: "Two separate federal provisions are in place today that may reduce a public employee’s or retiree’s Social Security benefit: the Windfall Elimination Provision and the Government Pension Offset. As a result, an anticipated Social Security benefit may be reduced due to participation in PERA. A PERA benefit, however, will not be reduced by any Social Security benefit received."

[Luv2play]

Unite

 

If they invested properly it wasn't really a problem. Most companies canceled pensions not because they were so incredibly expensive, but because there was a pile of money sitting there they could grab when they terminated the plan. Because benefits are frozen at the time the plan is terminated, and won't need to pay out until the workers retire,which means there was surplus to grab. (Benefits are based on your final X years of salary in the plan. So when they are setting aside for you, they project out to your retirement age and work toward a number that is heavily backloaded. So by ending the plan 20 years before you retire, not only is the number of years lower, the base salary that gets multiplied is lower, so there's excess they can skim. It massively screws over the employees, because they generally aren't making enough to set aside enough to cover the difference in benefits.You'r halfway through your career and half your time to save is gone, but your accrued benefit is FAR less than half of what it would be had the plan not terminated.)

The ugly side of capitalism.

[Epigonos]

In California if an individual is eligible for both a S(tate) T(eachers) R(irement) S(ystem) and a Social Security pensions the Social Security pension in prorated down. Although I am technical eligible for a $250 a month Social Security pension, I receive only $90 because of my STRS pension. I have been told that this systems is only true in California and New York but I will not testify to the truth of that.

Public school teachers (k - 12) in California do not pay into the Social Security System, however, they do pay into the medicare program system and are thus eligible for those benefit.

Edited April 25, 2021 by Epigonos

[+ keroscenefire]

In California if an individual is eligible for both a S(tate) T(eachers) R(irement) S(ystem) and a Social Security pensions the Social Security pension in prorated down. Although I am technical eligible for a $250 a month Social Security pension, I receive only $90 because of my STRS pension. I have been told that this systems is only true in California and New York but I will not testify to the truth of that.

 

I believe something similar happens in Colorado as well. Thanks for the information.

[+ WilliamM]

I believe something similar happens in Colorado as well. Thanks for the information.

Again, you are applying the social security/pension rules in some states to most States. And specifically to teachers.

 

Cast a much wider net

[BtmBearDad]

My father worked in academia for the last 30 years of his working life. Prior to that, much to the chagrin of his family, he was a Union organiser. My mother returned to work when I, the youngest, was in school full time. She retired about 25 years later as a commodities trader. My father received a low six figure lump sum in lieu of pension from his Union days, and monthly checks from TIAA-CREF, which survived him, and were then paid to my mother. My mother received a small pension from the first company she worked for (just about $600 a month), plus her 401K, which when she passed had just about a $55K RMD. Both received social security. They had a comfortable retirement, traveled to Europe every year for a few months visiting family, stayed out East every September, spent money fixing up/redecorating their homes, etc.. Unfortunately, they did not have long retirements. I encouraged them both, and especially my mother after my father passed, to spend the money and enjoy life. I like to think they did, but it does sadden me a bit when I think of what they didn’t get to do.

 

As for me, I have no pension from any company I’ve ever worked for. I have a healthy 401K, an IRA, plus my own investments and savings. Like I said in a previous post, I don’t care what’s left when I’m gathered to my forebears, as long as there’s enough to tip the gravediggers. My family knows not to expect anything as I fully intend to enjoy every minute I have on this earth - but whatever may be left is earmarked for my godchildren, a few friends if they survive me, and a few charities.

[+ keroscenefire]

Again, you are applying the social security/pension rules in some states to most States. And specifically to teachers.

 

Cast a much wider net

 

I fully admit that I am overgeneralizing, though PERA actually is not just a teacher pension in Colorado but applies to many state and local government employees as well. Both my mom and sister work for local/state governments and also get PERA.

 

So apologies if this does not apply to your pension. The rules I am speaking about are federal rules. But it sounds like maybe certain states/pensions have different set-ups to avoid those federal provisions.

 

In general my main point was that many (though clearly not all) people who get a pension are paying into that pension at a higher rate than people without pensions pay into social security. In Colorado we pay 8.75% of our paychecks into PERA, whereas a Coloradan without PERA would only pay 6.2% into Social Security. So overall, those of us with jobs contributing to this pension are taking home less per paycheck in exchange for likely having more robust pension payments in retirement.

 

Again this is just my experience with my job/pension. Just making the point with people saying, "Oh you're so lucky to have a pension," that part of having that pension (for me at least) is taking home less pay every single paycheck than I would if I had an identical paying job that only contributed to Social Security.

 

Don't get me wrong, I am glad I have that pension, but in my case there is some lost income now for more money in retirement later.

[+ tassojunior]

I served my 30-years sentence tied to a federal desk and left 1st day eligible at 55 for greener and pleasanter pastures. I'm under the old Sugar Daddy federal CRS retirement system where I recouped my contributions in under 2 years. Never bothered to jump through hoops to qualify for SSA even. Those were the retirement systems that made America great.

[+ WilliamM]

In

I served my 30-years sentence tied to a federal desk and left 1st day eligible at 55 for greener and pleasanter pastures. I'm under the old Sugar Daddy federal CRS retirement system where I recouped my contributions in under 2 years. Never bothered to jump through hoops to qualify for SSA even. Those were the retirement systems that made America great.

I guess you didn't like your job much if you left at age 55. Too bad

[Walker1]

I am rich in my dreams. I guess I saved enough for my kids and myself that I don't have to worry about working as a greeter at Walmart when I retire-so I must be rich?

[Lookin]

Last time I thought about being rich was about thirty years ago when I realized I could go out and buy a Rolls Royce for cash. Of course that would have been the only thing I could buy and I'd have to work the rest of my life keeping it gassed up and looking good.

 

 

And then I started thinking about Queen Elizabeth.

 

She not only had a Rolls Royce, but she had somebody to gas it up, keep it clean, and drive her around in it. And she had a Bentley or two to keep it company.

 

She had a house that was 700 times bigger than mine, and folks to make sure she never came across a speck of dust. And, if she needed a change of scenery, she had several other houses she could escape to, all of them castles and all of them tidied up, polished and dust-free.

 

If she needed something to hang on the wall, she could choose from hundreds of museum-quality pieces of art. If she wanted a new outfit, someone would make it for her in any color and any fabric, fitting her every curve, with a hat to match.

 

She could choose her jewelry from a stash of million-dollar pieces. She could think of anything she wanted to eat, and it would be cooked and brought to her on a silver platter.

 

She never had to pay a bill, or wonder if she remembered to bring a little extra cash. She had people to do that, and other people to think of what she might want and make sure she had it.

 

'Now that's rich!', I said to myself, and I've never again thought about being rich.

 

Except when I came across my favorite Thoreau quote: A man is rich in proportion to the number of things he can afford to let alone. Of course, that applies to women too and, in that regard, I'm not as far from Queen Elizabeth as I was thirty years ago. Allevai, I've got quite a few things I can afford to let alone.

 

In fact, when I think of folks who are technically rich but whose minds are preoccupied with becoming even richer or, even worse in my opinion, worried that somebody is going to come along and grab something from them, I wonder how being rich has made their lives better and if it may have actually made their lives worse.

 

These days, I sure couldn't go out and buy a Rolls Royce. In fact, I just finished up a year or so without any car at all. But I could walk or take the bus to a bunch of places where I was going to enjoy myself with little to trouble me along the way. Or I could just stay home and not bother counting my money.

 

http://www.deniskitchen.com/mm5/graphics/00000001/MNPC.167.B.gif

 

Of course, with my 60th high school reunion coming up, I might try to make some effort. ?

Edited April 26, 2021 by Lookin

[BtmBearDad]

I guess you didn't like your job much if you left at age 55. Too bad

 

Why on earth would you say that? Retiring early has very little to do with liking or not liking your job. It’s usually about finances. If you are in a financial position to retire early, you’d be foolish not to.

 

None of us are guaranteed any set time on this earth, and we’ve all probably known someone who worked right till retirement only to drop dead soon thereafter. Sorry, that’s not for me. I hope to be done and dusted around 55. While I enjoy what I do, there are many other things I enjoy more.

 

Retire as soon as you’re able, enjoy your life, and don’t disparage those who do just because their pastures are a bit greener than yours.

[seattlebottom]

Maybe it’s generational... why would talking about money and wealth be a taboo or off limits conversation?

 

It's mostly because in the USA we're supposed to believe that there is no class system.

[+ MysticMenace]

My fantasy...

 

http://38.media.tumblr.com/fcbe302ab4fb736b094662b42dbc7785/tumblr_nchbyqe7Jm1seznd4o1_r1_500.gif

 

But my actual reality...

 

[+ Lucky]

I knew a guy who waited as long as he could to retire so that he could get the maximum pension. He retired one day, only to die the next.

[+ Lucky]

My mother retired with a pension of $36/mo. It never changed during during the 37 years she survived after retirement.

But she had a loyal and devoted son. Can't put a dollar value on that.

[+ WilliamM]

Why on earth would you say that? Retiring early has very little to do with liking or not liking your job. It’s usually about finances. If you are in a financial position to retire early, you’d be foolish not to.

 

None of us are guaranteed any set time on this earth, and we’ve all probably known someone who worked right till retirement only to drop dead soon thereafter. Sorry, that’s not for me. I hope to be done and dusted around 55. While I enjoy what I do, there are many other things I enjoy more.

 

Retire as soon as you’re able, enjoy your life, and don’t disparage those who do just because their pastures are a bit greener than yours.

Hahaha

 

I liked my job very much, and wanted to mostly complete everything. That is implementing the Philadelphia Director of Housing program to attack predatory lending. But the biggest concern was visiting Russia during the White Nights and Munich when the English Garden was at the best and Milan for opera

Edited April 25, 2021 by WilliamM

[Luv2play]

Why on earth would you say that? Retiring early has very little to do with liking or not liking your job. It’s usually about finances. If you are in a financial position to retire early, you’d be foolish not to.

 

None of us are guaranteed any set time on this earth, and we’ve all probably known someone who worked right till retirement only to drop dead soon thereafter. Sorry, that’s not for me. I hope to be done and dusted around 55. While I enjoy what I do, there are many other things I enjoy more.

 

Retire as soon as you’re able, enjoy your life, and don’t disparage those who do just because their pastures are a bit greener than yours.

 

I retired at 50 because 1) I was able to financially, and 2) while there were many things about my job I liked, such as international travel and working with interesting people in a high pressure environment, there were things I didn't like such as 1) having to be discreet about being gay and having not enough time to myself to enjoy things I like such as reading ,travel on my own account to places I wanted to go to and doing other things with my time in fields I enjoy.

 

23 years later I have absolutely no regrets. My life after retiring from a job I had for 25 years has opened so many perspectives and experiences I never would have had had I stayed working. I could live where I wanted, which I took advantage of, join organizations I could give time to on a volunteer basis and thereby meet people of similar interests, and do things like collect art and books, which takes time to do.

 

Every day I wake up with a list of things to do, projects I am involved in that will culminate in something worthwhile and lasting, and a sense that I belong to a community that does not just have the common interest of receiving a pay cheque.

 

Oh, and I have a wonderful pension, fully indexed to inflation. So no complaints here. I realize I am a lucky guy and therefore try to share the good things I enjoy.