Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Except the universal can be cheaper if you are carrying it through old age . term is not always available at reasonable prices once you approach your 80's .
OP said she is 63 and in good health, not approaching 80. I'd be willing to bet she could get a 15 year 30k term policy for far less than $125/month. Put the difference in a savings account or in bonds and by the end of the term policy she could cash flow the funeral.
Whole Life, Universal Life, Term Life..... It seems there is a lot of opinions on each of them, and that depending on your opinion they must all be rip-offs! Based on the original post I would say that our 63 year old ABSOLUTELY needs life insurance, The kids very well may need life insurance! Rather than determining why permanent life insurance is a "rip off" or why term insurance wouldn't be available, I would suggest speaking with an INSURANCE adviser. He or She should be able to demonstrate the value of a policy and quantify the cost. Additionally they should act in your best interest in recommending such a plan.
Except the universal can be cheaper if you are carrying it through old age . term is not always available at reasonable prices once you approach your 80's .
Why do you still need LIFE INSURANCE IN YOUR 80's? That's the problem MathJak, you believe you need life insurance forever when you don't. Once your dependents are no longer dependents, you don't need it. If you want something to "pass on" to them, that's what your investments were supposed to be all about.
I agree 100% with what Dave Ramsey and Suze Orman have to say on this topic. Whole Life and Universal Life makes absolutely no sense for a middle class individual or family.
read what I wrote . there are very good reasons someone may want permanent life insurance right through until death and I outlined all the reasons above . there are many uses for it so you can go back and read what I posted earlier .
but never have I ever said 80 year olds NEED life insurance or in fact that anyone NEEDS it .. I said there are many uses for it through old age .
you do understand utilizing it and needing it are two different things I hope .
Universal life usually comes with an expiration date which can be earlier than expected if the interest is not high enough to take care of the policies expenses, mine did.
We bought a whole life policy for my husband when he was about 32. It was 100 thousand for about 67$ a month. Thirty years later ......well it helped. ...a lot.
they usually don't give you a termination date but if you don't keep feeding it at low rates it can't sustain itself .
the difference between universal and whole life is the insurance costs escalate as you age in universal . as you reach older ages the jumps are huge so eventually the policy terminates unless you keep feeding it .
premiums for whole life never changes and they are 100% premium all the time with no savings component . you must keep paying whole life until it is paid off .
with whole life you really are buying a contract with insurance company that cost the amount of the death benefit . the premiums are high because they guarantee you that money when you die for heirs or if the policy endows they will just send you a check since effectively you are self insuring .. they return the accumulated money you gave them with premiums ,interest and dividends less what they took out for profits and expenses for covering you all those years on their dime while your cash value accumulates enough to just about self insure on your own . ..
they usually don't give you a termination date but if you don't keep feeding it at low rates it can't sustain itself .
the difference between universal and whole life is the insurance costs escalate as you age in universal . as you reach older ages the jumps are huge so eventually the policy terminates unless you keep feeding it .
premiums for whole life never changes and they are 100% premium all the time with no savings component . you must keep paying whole life until it is paid off .
with whole life you really are buying a contract with insurance company that cost the amount of the death benefit . the premiums are high because they guarantee you that money when you die for heirs or if the policy endows they will just send you a check since effectively you are self insuring .. they return the accumulated money you gave them with premiums ,interest and dividends less what they took out for profits and expenses for covering you all those years on their dime while your cash value accumulates enough to just about self insure on your own . ..
That simply just is not true...again. Looking at one of my whole life policies, took out in my early 20's, pay $211.68/year, fixed since it's whole life. The original death benefit has grown from $25,000 to $42,693. The policy is paid up at age 65 and after that continues to accumulate to age 100 when it endows. Just exactly how does the math work out again...I'll pay in $8467.20 in 40 years of premiums and the death benefit has already far surpassed that figure in just 25 years. Running those numbers through a retirement calculator, at 8%, that same $211.68/year would have gotten me $16,924 to date. How exactly is this "self-insuring"???
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
