The Moneyist says the plan is viable and highlights spousal and survivor rules. Official SSA guidance pegs the spousal benefit at up to 50% and full retirement age at 67 for anyone born in 1960 or later.
MarketWatch has amplified a letter from a reader, a former service member with a second civil-service pension, who is weighing retirement at year’s end. The couple expects a little over $7,000 a month after taxes, drawn from two pensions of $3,600 and $1,500 and roughly $3,500 in Social Security, against an estimated $4,000 in monthly outlays. He is nearing 65; she turns 65 in January.
The column, part of the site’s Moneyist franchise, answers plainly that, with that level of guaranteed income and prudent budgeting, retirement looks sustainable, while noting that delaying Social Security typically improves the long-run outcome.
Social Security: The rules that matter
The viability of their plan hinges on two critical elements. First is the timing of Social Security. Second is the structure of benefits for spouses and survivors. On timing, the Social Security Administration’s official planner sets the full retirement age at 67 for anyone born in 1960 or later. Claiming before that age permanently trims the monthly check; waiting can raise it through delayed retirement credits. The agency’s page for those born in 1960 or later lays this out without adornment: full retirement at 67, early eligibility at 62 with a reduced amount.
On spousal coverage, the Social Security Administration states that a spouse’s benefit “can be up to one-half” of the worker’s benefit at full retirement age. If a spouse files earlier, the payment is reduced for life. For couples in which one partner has little or no U.S. earnings history, this is the bedrock rule that protects household income. In the MarketWatch letter, the wife, a lawful permanent resident who did not build a U.S. work record, would rely on this provision while both spouses are alive.
If the primary earner dies first, the survivor framework is more generous. SSA guidance says a widow or widower can receive between 71% at age 60 and 100% at full retirement age of what the deceased spouse was receiving. The letter writer says he has also elected survivor options on both pensions and maintains a $240,000 life-insurance policy, which would add a one-time cushion on top of monthly survivor benefits.
How to make the plan work
The Moneyist’s advice is in line with the academic literature that treats claiming as an optimization problem rather than a hunch. A working paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research (How Much Lifetime Social Security Benefits Are Americans Leaving on the Table?) finds that “virtually all” workers aged 45 to 62 should wait beyond 65 and that more than 90% should wait until 70, yet only about 10% actually do. The median hit to lifetime discretionary spending from claiming too early is estimated at $182,370, with typical households seeing a double-digit gain in lifetime spending if they optimize their filing date. In practical terms, the longer a healthy worker can wait, the larger and more secure the baseline income becomes for both spouses.
Still, retirement is more than a claiming date. It is also about cash management when markets turn. With two defined-benefit pensions indexed to their own rules, the couple in this case is insulated from having to sell assets at a loss to pay the bills. Even so, large managers emphasize holding a liquid buffer. T. Rowe Price frames it as a “cash cushion” designed to cover spending through a prolonged downturn so retirees are not forced to tap portfolios at the wrong time. Its guidance typically suggests one to two years of expected living expenses in readily accessible cash or equivalents.
This strategy aligns with a fundamental budgeting principle: match guaranteed income to fixed costs, and fund discretionary items from variable sources. A military or civil-service pension is the very definition of guaranteed income and, alongside Social Security, can be mapped to nonnegotiable bills such as housing, utilities, food and insurance. Financial planners who work with service members often start there, then layer investment income or part-time earnings for travel, gifts and big-ticket replacements. First Command, a firm that works extensively with military families, frames the pension as “substantial guaranteed, lifelong income” that can anchor the plan while leaving room for growth assets elsewhere.
There are open questions the letter cannot answer. The writer does not say whether he will actually delay his own Social Security claim to age 67 or even 70, nor does he break down the $140,000 between cash and the Thrift Savings Plan, which carry very different risk and liquidity profiles. The monthly budget of $4,000, while realistic today, may not include episodic costs that arrive without warning: a new roof, a major car repair, dental implants, hearing aids or base-level long-term care. Health coverage looks robust given Medicare plus Tricare, but even strong coverage has deductibles and limits. The prudent response is to stress-test the plan for adverse inflation and health scenarios and to set aside a dedicated replacement fund for the home and car alongside the emergency cash buffer.
Even with these caveats, the core of the analysis remains intact. The couple’s recurring, guaranteed income exceeds their fixed outlays by a healthy margin. The wife’s eligibility for spousal benefits while both are alive and survivor benefits if she outlives her husband reduces the tail risk that often undermines single-income households. And the presence of survivor elections on the pensions plus a defined life-insurance benefit further mitigates that risk. This analysis concludes that retirement is “doable” provided the couple continues to plan for contingencies and avoids locking in a lower Social Security check without need.
