Do this when you are young, too. Doing this when you're older, say 50+, can still work, it's just harder. Unless I pay my mortgage off early, before I qualify for Social Security, I'll still be paying it. On the other hand, it's less than $800/month, so I am not too worried.

A mortgage is a sort of reverse bond. Ideally, you pay it off aggressively shortly before you plan to retire.

This whole blog series is great, and I'd recommend it, but this particular post is the one responsive to the mortgage and retirement part:

https://earlyretirementnow.com/2017/10/11/the-ultimate-guide...

I paid my mortgage off in my late 20s as a hedge against future unemployment.

Do retirees have to pay property taxes?

Yes, but usually receive a discount for being seniors. That’s why I said low cost of living. Tennessee is nice.

And a lot of places freeze your property tax at 65, so you never have to pay more.

A lot as in only 6 of the 50 states?

*http://www.ncsl.org/research/fiscal-policy/state-property-ta...

Most property tax is local not state. I don't have the percentage breakdown, but I have encountered this multiple times within my family (anecdotal I know). It's quite possible that this percent is not a majority.

Plus, your link is more like ~14/50 states if you're only considering lower income folks.

Social security is a supplement, it’s not meant for you to live off, nor should you expect it to always be around.

Social security is meant to be a foundation, not a supplement. It's supposed be enough to live on, but not enough to live luxuriously on.

Social Security, in my retirement? That's a laugh.

While it is fashionable to doubt that Social Security will be around for the Gen X or Millenial retirements, the reality is that it's simply a matter of political will.

If people like Social Security (and they generally do), then all they have to do is vote for politicians who will protect it, and harass politicians when it looks like they won't.

Of course it's fine to plan for a retirement without Social Security... having too much money in retirement is not generally considered a problem.

But if you're feeling despair over Social Security, know that there is something you can do about it: political organizing.

IMO, publicly despairing that social security won’t exist in the future only serves to shift the Overton window, making it more likely that social security won’t exist.

Of course it won’t exist. It’s an asinine, regressive policy that uses trick after evil trick to convince voters that it’s not an unholy abomination.

I know my rhetoric sounds like a joke, but I’m 100% serious. You have the fake notion that “employers pay half” (no, the worker pays 100% of it truly), you have its regressive nature (poor people start working earlier and also die earlier, so it’s a redistribution towards the wealthy), you have the fact that it’s sold as a sort of insurance/retirement account when in actuality it’s neither.

Honesty, you’d be hardpressed to find a more awful government “safety net” program. I miss the days when I supported myself only on illegal income and got to avoid the whole issue. Alas, those days are gone.

>You have the fake notion that “employers pay half” (no, the worker pays 100% of it truly)

You have the fake notion that if we didn't have SS, employers would pay you more.

>you have the fact that it’s sold as a sort of insurance/retirement account when in actuality it’s neither.

It is in actuality neither. However, because of it, seniors were the age group who were least likely to be in poverty during the recent recession. During those years, it really acted well as a safety net.

I agree. I think Social Security, like Medicare, is a "third rail" sort of thing. I expect politicians will have to cut back military spending before they can go after Social Security

You haven't heard of Paul Ryan?

Politicians don't listen to you or me. They listen to Moneybags McGee and his PAC. The vision of democracy that you described in that comment doesn't exist in the United States.

The fact that Social Security has survived for several decades is evidence otherwise. Even Moneybags McGee knows better than to poke at AARP and the most reliable voting demographic in the world.

Even the conservative assumptions of the SSA show that SS will have some funding for your retirement, just not 100% of what is current promised. (Something like 75% 30 years from now)

Social Security will exist in some form because Americans won't let the elderly starve en masse, but there will likely be partial means testing (people with higher incomes or possibly assets get lower benefits), higher eligibility ages, and lower basic benefits.

Even on the current path, if no changes are made to improve solvency, social security will pay out at about 75%.