Speaker 1: 1:12

Welcome back to the Make the Most of your Money podcast, colin. How are you? I'm great, taylor, how are you? Very good. We've been talking about kind of retirement-specific topics with long-term care and Medicare, and I think a natural next topic and something we have not talked about yet, is Social Security. It's an incredibly important program that affects almost all of us here, and so it's worth having a fairly detailed discussion on how it works and, mostly, just how to think about it in the context of your financial plan. So, starting with how it works, I think everybody's at least familiar with Social Security and has heard of it. I think the generalized and fairly accurate description of Social Security is like a pension from the government. Right, it's going to be an income stream that lasts as long as you're alive. That's a good start, but there's a lot more to it. So, with that as a little teaser intro, what would you say about Social Security off the top?

Speaker 2: 2:11

Yeah, boy, there's so many different angles we can take this in and hopefully we can touch on all of them. I think, yeah, just outlining you know what is the program, how it works, how that benefit amount is calculated roughly and what are some you know claiming strategies. You know deciding when to take Social Security. When to take Social Security, obviously it's you know the biggest factor is how long are you going to live, which is something that none of us necessarily get to know. But then you know how does that change when you're married.

Speaker 2: 2:48

So, looking at some claiming strategies and then also looking at the you know kind of system as a whole, I mean a lot of people fear that the system's broken. Everybody's kind of heard about this insolvency for the Social Security Trust Fund. That's going to happen within the next 10 years and what does that mean? And that generates a lot of fear. And I've personally had a lot of clients come and say, well, you know, maybe I should claim Social Security now, as early as I can. You know, get it while I can, because maybe it's going away, and yeah, so I want to address some of those concerns and yeah, we'll just kind of see where the conversation goes.

Speaker 1: 3:29

I think we should establish that there are a thousand exceptions to everything we're going to say. So we're going to be speaking in generalities and, to save us all, I'm going to stop saying with the exception of, so we're just. You know, everything's going to be at the what's going to apply to most people. So, at its basic, yeah, social security is like an income stream that you can tap into when you're retired. Assuming that you've worked and paid into the system, the earliest you can begin receiving it is at 62. The latest, or the latest that it's beneficial to wait, is at 70. How much you receive will depend on how much you've earned and paid into the system over your career and then when you start it. So the more you've paid into the system, the higher your benefit will be, and the later you receive it, the higher your benefit will be. There's kind of a the math is interesting on how that works of, like, which way you frame it. Kind of you get less if you started earlier, more if you take it later. What would you add?

Speaker 2: 4:26

Yeah, I mean it's. It's the question of when you take it is. Is the government somewhat indifferent on that? I mean, is the government's somewhat indifferent on that? I mean, they've designed the payment amounts to be actuarially equivalent, meaning if you take it early, odds are you're going to get that lower benefit for longer the average person is, versus if you take it later and get a higher benefit, you'll get it for a shorter amount of time. And so, population wise, you know, for for the government, they're somewhat indifferent. Um, but there's still some interesting nuances to to like when you're talking about it at the level of an individual plan.

Speaker 1: 5:07

Um, I always think that's interesting that, sorry real quick, you said the actuarially, actuarially equivalent. That's a fun one. Um it. It is like if you live to like life expectancy, it's basically a wash.

Speaker 2: 5:20

Yeah, the break-even age is around like age 81 or so, 81, 82, um, which you know maybe is a little below average for women, a little above average for men. But you know, basically that's the break-even. If you die right at average, at the break-even, it doesn't really matter. When you started it, you will have gotten the same amount out.

Speaker 1: 5:38

Sorry, I cut you off. Do you remember what you were going to say?

Speaker 2: 5:51

Yeah, I was going to say maybe it would be helpful to start with understanding into the Social Security Administration website and maybe not even are aware that they have a benefit statement that shows you know what their projected benefits are when they reach retirement age. Sure, yeah. So what do you? I'll ask you, what do you look at when somebody you know sends you their, say, somebody's 45 years old? They send you their Social Security benefits statement. They maybe have never looked at this document before. What do you call out?

Speaker 1: 6:25

So that's interesting, the 45-year-old kind of changes my answer. The number one thing I'm trying to understand when I see a statement is what their primary insurance amount is, and that's a very important term to Social Security. It's a jargony term, for sure, but it's basically like what your full benefit would be at your full retirement age, and that is all defined by Social Security based on when you were born, and that number is calculated based on how many years you worked and paid into the system and that's what drives all of the how much your benefit would be if you start earlier or later. So the primary insurance amount is incredibly important For somebody at 45,. Honestly, I just want to see the statement should all.

Speaker 1: 7:09

Well, I guess I've changed a little bit. It used to show your full earnings record of what you paid into it, but at 45, you're mostly I'm just mostly making sure that that's accurate, that what the earnings record shows is actually what happened, because there are plenty of cases where I don't know. It shows I made $28,000 in 2007. And it's like, no, that was not it at all, and so sometimes you have to correct those things. But at 45, that's really what I'm looking for. I mean not to get ahead too much. But yeah, 45-year-olds, 15, 20 years away from claiming there's a lot of question marks on what that's going to look like, where I'm not putting a ton of weight into that right now, but that's what I'm primarily looking at at that age.

Speaker 2: 7:46

All right, yeah, maybe that wasn't a good example, let's say 55. You're not too far off. You may still be working in the prime of your career highest earning years, but you're just starting to think about retirement. What does that state?

Speaker 1: 8:01

Yeah, it's looking at that, trying to identify that primary insurance amount and understanding the range of options.

Speaker 1: 8:06

Just to orient on, like, okay, you know, is this somebody that's paid a lot into the system and social security is going to be a very heavy part of their income plan? I would also say like, yeah, this is where, as I'm answering this, I'm realizing that it's you can't look at anything in isolation. Like you know, a $3,000 a month benefit could be a huge part of somebody's plan or an immaterial part of their plan. So, like, it's never the first thing I look at, but it's always like, kind of in the context of the other things. Like, okay, what other income sources are they going to have in retirement? So, yeah, but first glance it's checking for accuracy, just orienting on okay, what kind of benefit do we have here? And, if they're married, looking at the spouse's benefit as well, because there's some interesting opportunities for spouses to possibly earn more than what they're or receive more than what their own statement would say if they're married. Yeah, we want to talk about that.

Speaker 2: 8:59

I would say. Another important caveat there is. This statement is projecting your benefit, and when they do that, they're assuming that is, the Social Security Administration is assuming you continue to earn the same income that you earned in the previous year, every year until you hit that full retirement age.

Speaker 2: 9:21

So that may or may not be accurate. If you're going to retire at 67, at your full retirement age, sure that'll be a great projection. If you're planning to retire at 55 and you've only gotten 20 years of work history or higher income history, that benefit amount may be overstated.

Speaker 1: 9:42

Yeah, that's a great point and that's where I know we're trying not to get too far into the weeds. But some of this just needs to be understood that your benefit amount, the primary insurance amount, is calculated on your 35 highest earning years in your career. And so there's some interesting understanding that can identify, like, highlight a few, like odd scenarios where if you're making less later on in your career, working more may not actually improve your benefit. If you're, if you've not completed 35 years, then working any amount could improve your benefit or increase your benefit. But yeah, your point is saying so.

Speaker 1: 10:17

If you're 55, let's say that you started working at 30. For some reason, you're 55 years old, you get your benefit statement. It's going to assume that you made the income you made last year until your full retirement age, which is probably around like 67 years. So it's building in the assumption that you're going to work 12 more years. If you're going to retire at 60, then that statement is flat out wrong, right that you're only working five more years. And there's a lot of math and like. This is where, once you've looked at enough of these, you can get start to understand the sensitivities of them, to where that example I just used maybe a $3,000 benefit. Monthly benefit is actually gonna be like 2,00 if they're going to retire earlier. If it's somebody's yeah, yeah, just understanding that is really, really important.

Speaker 2: 11:02

Yeah. So let's say, like you are ready to retire, you know what your benefit is going to be. You know at your full retirement age. Maybe you're 62 now and so you could claim Social Security now. What goes into deciding whether to claim it now or wait and claim that higher benefit, either at full retirement age or even beyond full retirement age up to age 70?

Speaker 1: 11:31

Well, it's a very simple answer. All we need to know is two variables to be able to give the correct answer. All we need to know is two variables to be able to give the correct answer. We just need to know how long you will live and what rate of return your investments will earn. If we know that, we can tell you with absolute precision.

Speaker 2: 11:50

Yeah, and my crystal ball is right over my shoulder right here.

Speaker 1: 11:54

I was saying that jokingly, but ultimately any level of analysis generally is going to come down to that right it's going to be how long are you going to live? And then what would that money do? In this case, you're assuming that there's options. For some people there is no option and social security is just what they have. But if you're in a situation where you're saying I'm retiring at 62, should I draw down on an IRA account or start claiming Social Security? Is that more of the example you're thinking of?

Speaker 2: 12:18

Yeah, yeah.

Speaker 1: 12:21

Yeah, I mean that's. I mean really it does come down to okay, ultimately, quantitatively. It comes down to again how long are you going to live and what rate of return are you going to earn? And I think this is where understanding what the client's risk preference is and like what they're investing those dollars in is really important how material the social security benefit is to the overall plan. You know, if it's going to be a huge chunk of it, we'll probably treat it a little bit differently than if it's just kind of an inconsequential amount. So, yeah, I mean, that's just where there's.

Speaker 1: 12:52

I got so many other variables pop in my mind trying to answer that. I think, generally speaking, I am a fan of all else being equal, delaying it. I think it's just an incredibly powerful tool. It's also it's about it's not exactly around an 8% increase each year that you wait. So that's pretty nice and that can really add up. We should also add we didn't like Social Security does have a cost of living adjustment, so it's inflation adjusted each year, and so, all else being equal, I am a fan of delaying it. Yeah, there's just so many times that could change. So how do you think about that? The same thing.

Speaker 2: 13:35

Yeah, I mean, I think your, your, your caveats are well taken. Obviously, if you need the money like Social Security is going to be your main source of income in retirement, you have to claim it. So so, yeah, we, we probably are speaking more to people that you know have options and have substantial savings outside of this, that they have a choice to make. You know, yeah, there are a lot of variables and unknowns that go into it, but there's some framework that we can put around it and some, you know, kind of lessons you can take away from just how the math works, you know. So I mean, I would say lesson one you know, let's just think about it in a simple case like an individual, you know, not married, so we're not thinking about optimizing benefits between spouses, we're just talking about a single person Then, really, life expectancy is the main input.

Speaker 2: 14:41

We already threw out that number 81, 82 as being the break-even point. You know there's going to be a different you know slightly different break even depending on whether you claim it 62 or 63 or 64. But roughly, 81 or so is kind of the magic break even where if you expect to live longer than 81, then there can be potentially large benefits for delaying to age 70. And that's just because those benefits are for life and so waiting to get the higher benefit can result in you having a larger total cumulative lifetime benefit. I mean, the other thing we're trying to optimize here is not just getting the most out, but it's like reducing the likelihood of running through your savings, like by living too long. And so in this case, like delaying helps on both of those fronts it can help maximize the total benefit, but it can also reduce the likelihood of running out because later in life, if you waited to claim, you've got that higher benefit.

Speaker 1: 15:57

Yeah, I think that's almost a counterintuitive point. You're saying by deferring Social Security and drawing on your assets now, you actually could decrease the likelihood of depleting your assets later. Yeah, exactly, yeah, it's interesting. Yeah, those benefits assuming everything goes according to plan, can become incredibly valuable like socially, like an interesting exercise. People don't like to say this, but the social security program is actually like an incredible benefit If you look at how much money you pay into the system and how big of a benefit you get out. It's part of the reason why it's having some funding issues. But if you ever looked at like the value, like what it would take to recreate your Social Security benefit in a pension or an annuity, it can be a million, two million dollars of a lifetime, like of like a present value, not to get too nerdy, but like it's an incredibly valuable tool and so, yeah, that's interesting.

Speaker 2: 16:51

It's an incredibly valuable tool and so, yeah, that's interesting. Yeah, I mean, if you think about it that way, then maybe there should be a little more analysis or thought going into your claiming strategy, because you're playing around with what is, you know, cumulatively, potentially a million dollars or more, and there could be big swings in terms of what that value is to you, based on when you decide to claim it.

Speaker 1: 17:14

You can do more analysis, but it's still going to come down to those two things.

Speaker 2: 17:18

At the end of the day, yeah, at the end of the day, yeah. If you knew when you were going to die, I could tell you the perfect claiming strategy.

Speaker 1: 17:26

Well, and that's where, also, you know, like, how charitably inclined are you, how much are you worried about legacy? You know, like, how charitably inclined are you, how much are you worried about legacy? You know that's a variable that can affect the decision. If, like, really preserving your assets is like super, super important, that could change things. I think you brought up the longevity thing being like the biggest determinant, and that's where you know I said, all else being equal, I'm a fan of delaying.

Speaker 2: 17:55

If there's unfortunate reasons where you don't think you're going to live a long time, then earlier is obviously better. That's kind of an obvious point, but I felt the need to say it for some reason. Yeah, yeah, let's, let's talk for a minute. I mean so. So the individual case is like, in some ways, the most straightforward. You're just thinking about one person's benefit. You know when to take it. Let's touch on briefly the strategies for couples, because that gets a little bit more complicated.

Speaker 1: 18:13

Yeah, yeah, I mean it adds a lot of complication because I guess, just mechanically speaking, we've talked about how your benefit would work and if you're married, your spouse will have their own benefit that would be based on their own record, and if they're both like basically what we're getting towards is there's something called the spousal benefit, to where, if you have a situation where one spouse made significantly more and one either well or just one spouse didn't work, you could say, let's say, the primary insurance amount for person one is $3,000 a month and the primary insurance amount for person two is $1,000 a month. The primary insurance amount for person two is $1,000 a month. There's actually a way for person two, the lower earning spouse, to get a higher benefit than what their own would be through what's called the spousal benefit. There are exceptions to this, but the simple math is they would basically be able to receive up to one half of the higher earning spouse's benefit.

Speaker 2: 19:11

And so that's a very important thing to at least be aware of. Yeah, and there's a lot of technicalities in this that we're not going to get into, but I think your just general rule of thumb is the low-earning spouse and these things are not gendered. So you sometimes see it referred to as the husband's benefit and the wife's benefit, as if the wife were the one staying at home. There's no, you know there's no gender written into the law. It just tends you know that tends to be the more common scenario, but it works either way and typically, you know, the low income or non-earning spouse would get up to half the benefit of the higher earning spouse the major.

Speaker 1: 19:56

That's a nice thing, but regardless of whether you're receiving the spousal benefit or claiming on your own record, what happens when one of the spouses passes away is also super important. At its simple level, the higher of the two social securities is what continues. Higher of the two social securities is what continues. So in that example, if person one's is $3,000 a month and person two's is $2,000 a month, there's no spousal benefit. But if either of them passes away, the higher benefit is going to continue on, and that's super important and is going to tie back to what we were just talking about about when to claim in a second. But the survivor benefit is really, really helpful.

Speaker 2: 20:32

Yeah, yeah. So thinking of those two things just at a high level. A couple of takeaways are is that the spouse with the higher PIA primary insurance amount should begin his or her benefits based primarily not on their own life expectancy but on the life expectancy of the second spouse to die. So that you know, say I'm married, my wife is much younger than me. Not only is she a woman and expected to live longer because she's a woman, but you know she's also 10 years younger than me and so she's, you know's, going to live even longer. I should decide when to assuming I was the higher earning spouse I should decide when to take my benefit based on how long she's expected to live.

Speaker 1: 21:24

Yeah, and that's what I want to say is, in that situation there's even more benefit to the higher earning spouse deferring as long as possible, because that benefit is going to last, in theory, even longer, and so that's something that, if there is a you know, it seems like Social Security needs to be tapped. The lower earning spouse is the better one to turn on in that case, to let the higher earning spouse's benefit increase even more, to have a higher benefit for the long term.

Speaker 2: 21:51

Yeah, yeah for sure. So if you expect at least one of you to live well beyond you know 81, or the year that the higher earner turns 81, then most couples would maximize their cumulative lifetime benefits by having that higher earner delay until age 70.

Speaker 1: 22:15

How much do you think about taxes when thinking about this? Because Social Security benefits, at least for now, is taxable for a good chunk of society. It's weird If you make a very small amount, then it's not taxable and then half of it's taxable, but if you make a whole bunch of money, at least 85% of the benefit is going to be taxable. There are income taxes on Social Security. How much do you think about taxation of Social Security benefits when?

Speaker 2: 22:45

claiming. I think it's important. I mean it's, you know, the one strategy I advocate for a lot of, like a lot of retirees in those years before they claim Social Security but after they've retired, is looking at doing things like Roth conversions to, you know, move some of that pre-tax income into their Roth, that pre-tax savings into their Roth accounts. And because there could be huge benefits with doing that in those intervening years between when you've retired and when you're taking Social Security, when you're going to be in a lower tax bracket. So that kind of sometimes can push you towards delaying, also because that gives you more time to do things like Roth conversions. I think taxes do play a bit of a role, like you said, I think for most clients of wealth managers their Social Security benefit is going to be 85% taxable. That's the highest amount.

Speaker 1: 23:52

Yeah, the thresholds for that have not changed. They have not been indexed for inflation, so the calculation is called provisional income. It doesn't matter how you calculate it, but the thresholds have not changed to where, like more and more and more people are in that 85% taxation bracket.

Speaker 2: 24:05

Yeah, it's something like you've got to. For a couple you've got to be below 50-some thousand.

Speaker 2: 24:12

I don't know the exact number, but it's fairly low when you think about a two-person household living on an income of under $50,000. There's a lot to think about here. Like we've been saying, tell me when you're going to die and I'll tell you the best strategy. Tell me when you're going to die and I'll tell you the best strategy. Let's get to some of the concerns that I hear from clients around. Like you know, is social security even going to be around?

Speaker 1: 24:43

Well, yeah, so it's interesting. We kind of are. You know, you deal primarily with retirees right now and I deal with a lot of people 30, 40 years old, and so it'd be fun to kind of talk about how our conversations around Social Security go. I kind of jokingly say it, but also mean it. I don't count on Social Security for myself, and that's actually an extreme take and too extreme, but, like, most of our plans are just built with the assumption that it's going to be zero. Now, actually, that is, I don't think, correct, but that's the attitude I'm trying to take towards social security at this point.

Speaker 2: 25:15

I mean it's like I want to build in enough margin of safety in my plan that I'm not relying on it.

Speaker 1: 25:22

Yeah, so what about you? How do you talk about it for the person that is 62 years old and actually has a chance to do something about it right now?

Speaker 2: 25:30

Yeah, I would say look historically at changes. We've had changes to social security structure before. With every previous major change to the benefit structure or the rules or the rules, there has always been a grandfather clause for folks that are already 62 of an age where they could claim or even close to that age of 62. And so if you're, you know right now the big deadline that gets touted is Social Security becomes insolvent in, you know, somewhere around 2033, 2035. We should talk about what that means in a second. But if you're going to be 62 by then, or very unlikely that, the current structure is going to change for you, so, go ahead.

Speaker 1: 26:48

Yeah, that's the point I want to make. I do want to talk about what does it mean? Social Security taxes and money comes out for people receiving benefits. Right now, more money is going out than is coming in on a yearly basis, so that essentially means the program is drawing down on their savings. There's a Social Security trust fund that has had a surplus built up over the years that is going to be depleted around 2030 to 2035. All that that means is there won't be.

Speaker 1: 27:15

If $100 is going out, there's only $80 going in, and so if there were no changes and we just kept on going like at worst, right now you would receive 80% of your benefit or 78% of your benefit. It's not going to just go away completely like in 2033. It's not bankrupt in that sense. It's just like ah, we don't have as much coming in as going out. So I think number one, like the idea that it's going to zero, is just literally not how the math works, right. I think the question becomes though okay, what are they going to do about it? Because it's not sustainable. I mean, I guess, in theory, you could just pay out only what comes in and just completely redo the whole math. I'm going to insert my own opinion here, and I think it's what you were touching on. I cannot imagine the world where they cut benefits for current retirees. I think there would be a civil war, literally. You know what I mean. It would just be absolute mutiny. That's only opinion. This is not based on any fact.

Speaker 2: 28:12

Just look at who votes. Retirees vote in the highest-go.

Speaker 1: 28:37

Like the fact that it's still only you could start as early as 62 is not how the system was originally designed. You could increase the tax rate, like the FICA tax rate. You could increase right now there's a maximum that you can pay taxes on. They could increase the maximum. But I think like one of the things they have to do is for the 30 year olds out here be like no, you're, you're going to start. You could start claiming at 75 or to increase that age, and so that to me is like the the highest impact one. But again, this is totally opinion and that's where I kind of go back to the 35 year old planning going there'll be something, but let's just not make it a core part of the plan. And then for the person nearing retirement, I could be completely wrong, but I've kind of I don't. When I hear people say I need to start it now because it's going away, I'm like yeah, I don't totally agree with that.

Speaker 2: 29:30

Yeah, yeah, yeah. I try to convince people that you know it's going to be there, especially if you're close to that 62 already. It's probably not. You're going to be grandfathered in. Yeah, I mean it's interesting what you said there have been a number of and I don't want to get political or whatever because I have views on what should happen or what would fix it happen or what would fix it. But I think understanding what proposals are out there to fix it can kind of help frame it for people. So, like what you said already, you could raise the payroll tax cap. So right now the current cap is $168,000 of wages. So if you make more than that, you don't pay Social Security tax on the wages that are above that $168,000. It's just not taxed for Social Security purposes. So you could raise that $168,000 to $250,000 or put no cap on it and instantly Social Security would be solvent again. That's a proposal that would be favored by Democrats.

Speaker 2: 30:41

Raise taxes on the higher earners. Why is that income exempt from it? So you could also increase the payroll tax rate. Right now the Social Security tax is 12.4%. You know, right now the Social Security tax is 12.4% on wages. Half of that's paid by the employee. Half of that's paid by the employer. There have been proposals and bipartisan proposals to increase that from 12.4% to, you know, 14.8% over 20 years or something like that. Gradually increase it. That would bring in more revenue, you know. To fix it you could change the full retirement age like you said right now at 67. The pushback against that is like that might work for you and for me who have cushy white-collar jobs.

Speaker 1: 31:29

It has to be way out there. It has to be way out there. That's a different angle than I thought.

Speaker 2: 31:33

Different angle, I thought you were like a manual labor job and you're like you know, gosh, I just can't do it anymore beyond 60, that's. That's a tougher situation, you know.

Speaker 1: 31:45

So they're gonna have to be carve outs for people that had, you know, physically demanding jobs or disability, or things like that yeah, that and well, there's a different program for disability, but that that that's actually interesting Because I think if you go back to how the program was originally designed and the exact numbers aren't exactly right but like you can start receiving benefits around like 65. Life expectancy at the time was like it depends on if you measure it from birth or if somebody who was 65, but it was like 75 years old, so it wasn't designed to be received for a long time. Yeah, and you had around 42 people paying into the system for every one person receiving benefits from the system. Now it's like life expectancy is way higher and you have, I think it's like two people paying in for everyone receiving so it. So it's just because they that's what I said they should have done this years ago is increase the age of when you could start receiving Social Security.

Speaker 1: 32:42

It was designed to be supplemental at the near the end of life, not to be the lion's share of your retirement for your entire retirement, and so, yeah, and that's where I said the math on the program is incredible. If you go look at like how much it's generally something like people will pay in $200,000 in taxes over their lifetime and they can receive $40,000 a year, inflation adjusted, for as long as they live. There's not an insurance company or pension company that could pull that off, and so the program's incredible for us receiving it, but there's a reason it's not going to last forever.

Speaker 2: 33:12

Yeah, and it's a demographic reason too. I mean, it's the baby boomers. That was this big population group that's now moving into retirement and starting to draw benefits, and now there's fewer people paying into it compared to when the baby boomers were working. Yeah, totally. So yeah, I mean, there's other proposals to fix it. I think the bottom line, though, is like it's not going to go away and there are ways to adjust it. There will be compromise, and no side is going to get 100% of what they want. They're going to be both fixes from the revenue side and fixes from the limiting the payout side, but it's not going away.

Speaker 1: 33:54

What are the big takeaways from this payout side? But it's not going away. So what are the big takeaways from this? I think understanding how the benefits are calculated, that it's based on your years worked and that the statement you receive assumes that you work all the way until your full retirement age, and so if you're thinking about retiring early, make sure you run an updated estimate. You can work with a planner to help you do that.

Speaker 1: 34:12

The ssagov website does have some tools, kind of hard to navigate, but there's some tools there you receive. You know your benefit increases the longer you wait and you'll get a little bit less the earlier you start it, but it's actuarially equivalent. So really the biggest determinant there is how long are you going to live Spousal benefits. If there's a spouse that didn't work, they could be eligible for higher benefits than their own record Survivor benefits. That the higher benefit between two spouses will continue, so there's more benefit for that spouse to defer, and that, while there are funding problems, going to zero is not on the table right now and then an inters insert opinion about what would happen to people currently receiving benefits. Is that pretty good summation?

Speaker 2: 35:02

yeah, I think that's great. We covered, covered a lot. Uh, I mean, I think we tried to stay out of the weeds. I mean there's a few numbers and things in there that are important to you know, conceptually get. But but yeah, I think that's a great summary.

Speaker 1: 35:16

Cool, Awesome. Like every topic, we could always go deeper, and actually I've got a book pulled up here that if people do want to read more. It's called Social Security Made Simple. It's by Mike Piper. He's a financial advisor. I think that's a great little handbook for understanding this stuff.

Speaker 2: 35:31

Yeah, and if there are any advisors listening, which I know we have a few. If you really want to get into the weeds and you're thinking about more complex situations where there's divorce or death, there's a book by I'm going to butcher the name William Richtenstein and William Myers called Social Security Strategies how to Optimize Retirement Benefits. That's more of like textbook, not for your everyday reader, but if you want to get into the weeds, I don't know, awesome.

Speaker 1: 36:09

Well, good stuff, man. I appreciate it as always, and we'll see you next time.

Speaker 2: 36:14

See you next time.