Retirement appears less and less likely for many people. Wages have barely improved in decades and the cost of living is going up, tempting some people to retire overseas. It could be done, but there are a ton of plans one has to make first. One can always retire abroad for much less. It's good to think that Social Security still pays benefits to overseas retired persons, though taxes on that income in a new home country may apply as well as to the United States.

Carrie The spousal benefit of 50% mentioned above is not the same as the survivor's benefit. Widows or widowers who have rearched full retirement age are normally entitled to 100% of the deceased spouse's benefit if it's greater than their own, but they cannot also collect their own. If your father were to die first, your mother would be entitled to his $800/month (assuming she's of full retirment age), but she could not also receive her own $500. Were she to die first, your father would continue to receive his $800/month because it's greater than the benefit of his deceased wife.

Go see your Social Security Office. You'll should call and make and appointment first. As other posters have said, the rules are many. If you have also worked and paid social security taxes, that will be considered. Basically, the amount you might get is computed in several ways and then the maximum benefit one is used. The various cases may be (1) your wages and lifetime contribution alone, ( 2) 50% of your spouce's amount, or (3) if disabled, the disabled amount. If you were born after a certain date, the full retirement age is increased above 65. At one time, the full retirement age was to increase in steps from 65 to 67. I have been retired long enough to have lost track of the current rules. If you are elgible at age 65 for full retirement, you can take early retirement (as early as 62) with a reduction in payments. The reduction is based on the average life expectancy. When I retired, life expectancy was age 77, e.g., half of your population group will have expired by age 77. The reduction works out to be 5/9 percent per month early, thus if you retire 3 years early, the reduction is (36 months x .05)/9 or 0.20 which is 20%. Is this bad? It depends on how long you will live. If you do not expect to live beyond 77, then early retirement is not a loss. You loose only if you live beyond 77. Here's why. If you retired at the normal age of 65, then the time span to 77 is 12 years; if retired at age 62, the time span to 77 is 15 years. Check it out. You'll find that the total money paid out over the longer time is exactly the same as that of the shorter span. For example, suppose the normal payout was $100 per month. The amount for 12 years is 12 x 12 x 100 = 14,400. Now suppose that you retired 3 years early. The payout is $80 per month. The amount for 15 years is 15 x 12 x 80 = 14,400. After age 77, the early payout plan is less than the other and the difference increases each year. Since I retired, life expectancy may have increased to 78 years. These calculations give amounts based on the current value of the dollar. As time goes by, there are COLA increases that will increase the payout to offset inflation to some degree. In my experience, the SS cost increase numbers do not fully cover the real inflation of the basics.

Julie. This is hard to explain and probably hard to understand at least for those who know my struggles. I've ask the state for some help. Medical for myself (rest of family has it) I've ask for some help twice to help provide something for Christmas for my two young kids still counting on Santa, I've ask for help with groceries a couple of times, I've ask for help to replace a broken furnace. .. I was denied every single time. Now although I would put my feelings aside and ask for help when needed I just can not accept money because I take care of my sick daughter. I chose this girl. I was there when she was born. I knew from the second she entered the world she was going to have a life of struggles and I knew I would also...but I chose to be her mother regardless. Absolutly the money would ease burdens, but it would also cause another sort of moral burden that I couldn't accept emotionally. I do accept help with home care nurses when needed. Once both my boys were admitted to hospital together so I had to have someone at the house with Amiee. A few times while on IV antibiotic therapy a nurse had to come. A few times I was unwell and someone came to help Amiee. I was grateful and happily accepted the help. I just can not make myself take money to care for her myself. For anyone that is ready to jump on me about this. This is not up for debate. I will not explain myself anymore than I have above. You don't have to agree with me but just for a second put yourself in my place.