- 19,035
Well could it have been a 60 year term?
it could have a whole lot of things, but if it ended at 80 the one thing it was not was whole life.
Whole Life: Northwestern Mutual Vs. State Farm Life Insurance
- Thread starter InsuranceAdvocate
- Start date
-
- Tags
- life insurance whole life
it could have a whole lot of things, but if it ended at 80 the one thing it was not was whole life.
- 687
Well, I do remember the agent telling me it was a permanent policy. He let me know that the al williams policy would end after 20 years and I would have nothing. I do remember that I was 20 or 21 and I can't believe that it was a 60 year term. Maybe it was some type of modified policy (I can't imagine what type) but all I know and remember was that it would increase in price after age 80. Are there any "permanent" insurance out here now that at age 80 increases in price?
- 19,035
It could have been an UL. Or the new agent could have been full of shat.
Yes, there are permanent policies that increase in price. They are UL's. They are not whole life. AARP's "permanent insurance" says clearly that the rates are "not guaranteed". It is not whole life.
- 687
This was 1986/87. He could have been simplifying it for me by saying whole life rather than ul because he knew I knew what whole life was.
- 4,132
That would be a UL.
UL's were full of fine print back in the day. Usually you had your first clue when you opened the first page.
UL's were full of fine print back in the day. Usually you had your first clue when you opened the first page.
Yes UL. It would make perfect sense for a UL contract to show an increasing COI that would have required more premium at this age, especially if it was only funded at Target. The Primerica agent was just pointing out the point when COI outpaced the target premium you'd been putting in, or was pointing out when COI had outpaced so badly that you needed to increase premium to prevent lapse.
Not whole life, whole life is guaranteed for life.
Not whole life, whole life is guaranteed for life.
- 16,907
There were a lot of whole life policies in the 70's that you paid one premium amount for x years and then you paid a higher premium for x years.
Prudential has a lot of them out there. They are usually around $10,000 policies and have child riders on them. I guess they were sold to young families to be more affordable in the early years.
The ones I see usually double the premium at age 65. The doubled premium usually falls not too much higher than a prefered rate FE policy would cost at age 65 for the Prudentials I've seen. Not terrible but easy to replace because they can take their cash value out and buy new.
I ran across a whole-life policy with 5 year premium increases just this week. It's a new design policy from a carrier I have but this product was sold direct to the public. VERY low rate for 5 years. Doubles in year 6. And multiplies by 5 in year 11.
I got the lady approved with prefered rate with Monumental but she is getting cold feet. She feels at age 62... How much longer can she really live? She can barely afford the premium now. She just can't worry about the premium raising to where she will have to drop the policy and lose every penny she paid in...because that's not happening to her today.
Some companies are just experts at separating financially irresponsible people and their money.
Prudential has a lot of them out there. They are usually around $10,000 policies and have child riders on them. I guess they were sold to young families to be more affordable in the early years.
The ones I see usually double the premium at age 65. The doubled premium usually falls not too much higher than a prefered rate FE policy would cost at age 65 for the Prudentials I've seen. Not terrible but easy to replace because they can take their cash value out and buy new.
I ran across a whole-life policy with 5 year premium increases just this week. It's a new design policy from a carrier I have but this product was sold direct to the public. VERY low rate for 5 years. Doubles in year 6. And multiplies by 5 in year 11.
I got the lady approved with prefered rate with Monumental but she is getting cold feet. She feels at age 62... How much longer can she really live? She can barely afford the premium now. She just can't worry about the premium raising to where she will have to drop the policy and lose every penny she paid in...because that's not happening to her today.
Some companies are just experts at separating financially irresponsible people and their money.
Last edited:
Modified whole life, lower initial premium and then turns into full blown whole life at some later date, usually at the attained age. Pretty much a guaranteed converting term product.
Used to be a lot more prevalent than it is today.
- Thread starter
- #19
InsuranceAdvocate
New Member
- 6
Right. I should be comparing apples to apples.
Here is my dilemma. I started a whole life policy (90 Life), 1 million death benefit, with Northwestern Mutual a year ago and have been paying into the policy since then. Recently, I happened to talk to a state farm agent and he was explaining to me that a 10 Pay Life policy would have been a better option. He advocated 10 Pay Life because after 10 years worth of premiums I would be done and the policy would be paid up while the cash value and death benefit would continually grow. He was all about minimizing risk and spoke about the fact that with the policy I currently have 90 Life, I would need to continually pay premiums for my whole life and even if I decide to select the premium offset option sometime in the future, there is no telling how long it will take for the policy to reach that point, just an estimation...and when I reach the point where I am allowed the option to choose premium offset there is no guarantee that it can be maintained year after year as the dividend scale changes over the years.
Currently, I have no problem paying the premiums in my 90 Life policy as my current income allows for it and I don't have much expenses. However, he asked me [in the future when I decide to buy a house and start making mortgage payments, paying property tax, etc... as well as start a family and incur expenses that come along with that as well, would I still be able to pay the premiums of my current 90 Life policy with no problem. Or if I decide to make a career change in the future and my new position has a significantly lower salary than what I currently have ..would I still be able to maintain the premium payments of my currently policy. Did I want to take the risk of paying indefinitely into the policy for x number of years to find one day the premiums were becoming a burden on my budget. He proposed that 10 pay Life was a better option because it shortens the amount of time I would have this financial obligation of paying premiums and it has a definite time (10 years) of when I no longer needed to pay premiums. Thus in short, the 10 Pay option would help decrease my financial risk of having these policy premiums become a liability that I carry with me throughout my life as such I would have with my current traditional whole life policy.]
That was a summary of his explanation as to why being 26 without much expenses a better option would have been 10 Pay Life. This got me thinking and pondering over the thought of continuing my current policy, reducing the death benefit of my policy (thus reducing the premiums as well) or cancelling my current policy and starting one that is 10 Pay Life.
Any comments?
Buy disability insurance.
Similar threads
