<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Deciding Whether to Take Early Social Security?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.bankaholic.com/finance/early-social-security/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.bankaholic.com/finance/early-social-security/</link>
	<description>Blogging about personal finance, foreclosures, mortgages, interest rates, and budgeting.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 03:45:46 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mark Cussen</title>
		<link>http://www.bankaholic.com/finance/early-social-security/comment-page-1/#comment-1641</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Cussen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Apr 2008 17:14:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bankaholic.com/finance/still-can%e2%80%99t-decide-whether-to-take-early-social-security-or-wait-consider-this/#comment-1641</guid>
		<description>I am simply assuming a hypothetical 9% return for the purpose of the example. There would of course be risk involved in that level of return; I was thinking primarily of historical long-term stock returns when I chose that rate. I also used age 90 because a growing number of people are living that long, even if it is still above the average. Of course, if you die sooner, then you will not need as much money, and you would probably invest your funds in something safer, but then you would get a correspondingly lower rate for a lesser period of time.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am simply assuming a hypothetical 9% return for the purpose of the example. There would of course be risk involved in that level of return; I was thinking primarily of historical long-term stock returns when I chose that rate. I also used age 90 because a growing number of people are living that long, even if it is still above the average. Of course, if you die sooner, then you will not need as much money, and you would probably invest your funds in something safer, but then you would get a correspondingly lower rate for a lesser period of time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gail</title>
		<link>http://www.bankaholic.com/finance/early-social-security/comment-page-1/#comment-1640</link>
		<dc:creator>Gail</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Apr 2008 17:01:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bankaholic.com/finance/still-can%e2%80%99t-decide-whether-to-take-early-social-security-or-wait-consider-this/#comment-1640</guid>
		<description>1-Where will one get a risk free 9% return? These numbers are unrealistic.
2-90 is an above average life span.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>1-Where will one get a risk free 9% return? These numbers are unrealistic.<br />
2-90 is an above average life span.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
