re: Whole life - I know

quote:

---

Does anyone know the commission rate for term?

---

Typically very similar to whole life, it’s just a much smaller premium.

quote:

---

I'm an idiot with money though so don't listen to me. Listen to slackster...I bet he is super rich.

---

Apparently touched a nerve.

LIRPs are a tool that may be appropriate for some, but it does nothing to change what I said earlier - whole life exists because people are dumb and will overpay for guarantees that traditional whole life offers.

But don’t listen to me, listen to L S Usetheforce who doesn’t know the difference between whole life and a VUL.

quote:

---

Yap I don't know shite. I pay someone to know shite.

---

Someone like me.

quote:

---

I just know my kids gonna get paid. And if I don't die I will too

---

I’m not shitting on LIRPs (life insurance retirement plans) altogether, just whole life specifically.

quote:

---

No, buy term and invest the difference. Whole life is a rip off and is sold only because the agent gets 50% of the first year premium as commission.

---

It’s more like 80% I believe.

Op unless you are worth $10 mil or more or you have one of a few very select variables such as pre existing conditions and can’t get life insurance, then yes as said get term and invest the difference.

First off the money is never yours’. You can ‘loan it’ from yourself, that’s it. Then when you die you don’t get the principle you get the insurance.

Everyone should have $25,000-$50,000 of whole life to take care of funeral costs and other final expenses. The vast, vast majority of the rest of your life insurance should be term, though. Carry yourself through retirement age then let the term go and still keep the whole life forever. Cover yourself according to your needs and nothing more. Life insurance isn’t supposed to make your family rich.

quote:

---

Everyone should have $25,000-$50,000 of whole life to take care of funeral costs and other final expenses.

---

Why?

quote:

---

life insurance should be term

---

Agreed for almost every need.

quote:

---

Life insurance isn’t supposed to make your family rich.

---

"Rich" is relative. If you dont think that life insurance will give your family a leg up... then what are we even discussing?

quote:

---

So, I’m self-insured.

---

That is my point. Kids or no kids. Married or not.

Insurance is for things that one cant afford. If i can afford a $25,000 bill, then i dont need to give my money to a whole life policy.

quote:

---

Posted by TDsngumbo online on 9/21/21 at 11:55 am to GeauxTigers777

Life insurance isn’t supposed to make your family rich.

---

For the record, i have a $250,000 universal life policy. It is built with $30,000 aggregate payments over 10 years and then is paid up in full for permanent $250,000.
If my wife loses income when i pass from social security and pensions, then this can offset those losses. But if she has passed, i have $250k tax free going to my 4 kids. "Rich" is a relative word. But it is a leg up that i can afford (a car payment basically).
Whole life is expensive. Life insurance shouldnt be.

quote:

---

Let me tell you my belief on anything but term, is most people stop paying their premiums. They get a sizeable net worth and it’s not longer an important bill, so they cut it out. Now some can argue, “worth it”. But you could have gone with term and saved a ton.

Remember that your kids only get your life insurance if you pay it until your death, paying insurance premiums for 30-40 years.

That’s my personal belief in talking to family in the business. It makes sense for some length of time then stops, win win for the insurance company.

---

There are common, unoriginal non term policies that do not require permanent payments.

As i said, i have a 10 year pay universal life policy with a guaranteed permanent $250,000 coverage. Those types of policies are out there (10 year, 20 year paid in full, 25 year paid in full, or paid up at 65). You just have to pay more monthly to secure them. That prevents 100% of what your concern is.
For me personally, $250,000 coverage is a lot of money despite my net wealth. Im not going to forget about it. Lol

I am still a "term is for 99% of people". My universal life policy is basically a permanent term product (no cash value) which is why i can secure $250,000 for only $30,000. My $30k is basically pissed away for all purposes but the life insurance.

But when people ask about income producing or cash value policies? I dont think they are good unless you are dirt poor (and dont have a dime invested in a mutual fund) or so rich that estate tax planning is your most pressing need (even then, i think no cash value life insurance is more affordable and thus a better option).