When to start receiving social security benefits?

Here are comments from others:
The article also fails to discuss various options for married couples where the higher SS eligible person files for SS but suspends receiving their check. This then allows the spouse to receive spousal SS checks while continuing to accrue their own SS benefits.
Nothing more than Political BS so that you don’t get your money out while the getting is good. That is like waiting until 70 and the breakeven is into the 80s. Check you family longevity and your health. At the end of your life why do you need more money any way. Let the Govt. pay for your healthcare. In addition SS will be out of business. Take your money and run.
No, the money goes to the Social Security Trust Fund. THEN, the Federal government borrows it, throws another IOU into the vault, and life goes on.
Many old people have tough physical and/or mental jobs requiring much energy & effort. Alot of their peers are younger so they get compared to them.
Also, in my case, my 2 bosses are barely 50, they made the comment that I make too much of my age. Since I am retiring at 63 1/2, I just said ” can’t respect your opinion on age since you are nowhere near my age.” When I was 50, I could do everything they “expect” from me now & I just physically can’t do it. I thought of putting in an age discrimination suit after that comment, but I don’t need the hassle of that. I will just let HR know what was said in my exit interview (they are big on what mangers say to their employees.)
I started to keep track of our household expenses a few years before I reached 62. Opportunity presented itself – a few months prior to I reached that point, our group was involved with a company-wide resource-action and after giving it some thought, I decided to take early retirement – that way, as soon as my employment ended, early pension plus 6-month worth of severance pay would help me bridge to my early SS benefit. My wife later received her spousal SS benefit when she reached 62. It turns out either my pension or my SS benefit alone would be sufficient to cover our monthly expenses – which leaves the other source of income plus my wife’s SS benefit as extra. All in all, it leaves our nest-eggs intact which we intend to pass it along to our offspring so that when they reach their retirement, they would be less stressful. BTW, on my death, my wife would be able to receive half of my pension and my SS benefit. I understand as this article suggested, every household’s situation all different. So good luck to everyone.

Call Connie 408-854-1883 for tax-free lifetime retirement without penalty, 8-13% growth with health benefits. motherhealth@gmail.com in 50 US states. No IRS, collectors or probates.

Last comments:

Please share the ruling, all I could find was a 1960 decision that said that benefits could be denied to an ex-patriot. Congress has the right to modify benefits and has done so many times. This is why “entitlement reducers” like Paul Ryan are so dangerous to those of us in our 50’s approaching retirement age.

Fleming v. Nestor, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that workers have no
legally binding contractual rights to their Social Security benefits,
and that those benefits can be cut or even eliminated at any time.
That’s a stretch, that’s the same 1960 decision I found. Wikipedia’s (I know, not 100% reliable) interpretation said:
“The Court ruled that no such contract exists, and that there is no contractual right to receive Social Security payments. Payments due under Social Security are not “property” rights and are not protected by the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment. The interest of a beneficiary of Social Security is protected only by the Due Process Clause.
Under Due Process Clause analysis, government action is valid unless it is patently arbitrary and utterly lacking in rational justification. This provision of §202(n) is not irrational; it could have been justified by the desire to increase the purchasing power of those living in America, because those living abroad would not spend their payments here.”
The “patently arbitrary and lacking in rational justification” could be used as argument against the likes of Paul Ryan and his ilk, who bent on taking away something we’ve paid into our whole lives.

Unfortunately, your last paragraph is entirely true. Had the government not been allowed to raid the piggy bank we would all be better off. Wish I had been able to invest all the $$$ I put in Social Security on my own. I’d have a MUCH better return on my money!