Whole Life Versus Term

[Question]

While reading around the net, i have increasingly come across many opinions that whole life is "a scam", since you can buy term for a smaller amount of money, which will cover you till age 65. At age 65 your house, car, etc will all be paid off, your children will be financially independant and you have your retirement savings to rely on, so the death benefit is "not necessary" unless you want to leave a large sum of money to your children.

Thoughts on this?

 

[VolAgent]

Do a search on whole life on the forum. I'm sure you'll find plenty of arguments both ways on this.

 

[GreenSky]

It's unlikely that any of us on this forum have an opinion on this subject.

Rick

 

[LGilmore]

"Thoughts on this?"

Absolutely none at all.

While you're doing this research look up "retiring red" and look around at your own family. Do any of them have life squared away at 65?

 

[Question]

Im increasingly impressed by how non helpful this forum is...

 

[xrac]

Here is a part of your answer. BTID is based upon your assumptions below. For how many people is this true. The average amount of money in a 401K is less than $50,000. Is that enough savings to not need LI?

....... At age 65 your house, car, etc will all be paid off, your children will be financially independant and you have your retirement savings to rely on, so the death benefit is "not necessary" unless you want to leave a large sum of money to your children.........

Here is another example of why BTID 99% of time is not a good approach. This is a direct quote from another forum:

Just got a call from an old acquaintance....... He's about to turn 70, and has a 200,000 term policy in place. He wants to put something permanent in place, because he's worried about outliving his term insurance and leaving his wife without a cash DB. He can't afford permanent premiums out of pocket right now,​

You know the funny thing is the people who are successful and have a lot of assets at the end of their lives and could get by without any LI are usually the ones who have some WL.​

------------------------------------

 

[Justin Bilyj]

This forum is only handy when you have specific questions. Asking one of the oldest philosophical questions about life insurance, won't get you far here, because it has been explained mercilessly. Do a search like all the new ones do, read all the posts you can, reread them again, THEN ask any question you want.
Asking the same question when it is posted tirelessly around here shows a few things
1. you don't read or search
2. your looking to start conversations cause your bored

 

[moonlightandmargaritas]

Im increasingly impressed by how non helpful this forum is...

Somebody twistin' your arm to come here?

 

[Death Cab For Tootie]

It's unlikely that any of us on this forum have an opinion on this subject.

Rick

Haha that's awesome, Rick.

To the OP - this argument has been done to death. The handy search function works quite well. But to give a simple answer: Nobody needs life insurance at all. But they may want term or permanent based on what it will do for them. Just so happens that permanent can do a lot more things than term can.

 

[xrac]

While reading around the net, i have increasingly come across many opinions that whole life is "a scam", since you can buy term for a smaller amount of money, which will cover you till age 65. At age 65 your house, car, etc will all be paid off, your children will be financially independant and you have your retirement savings to rely on, so the death benefit is "not necessary" unless you want to leave a large sum of money to your children.

Thoughts on this?

Term = temporary
Whole = permanent.

Which does one want?
Which do they need?
Which can they afford?