Just like $1 bill is worth the same as 4 quarters if using it at the grocery, yet they have different features: In a fire the quarters survive, but the dollar bill doesn’t. Same applies if they’re on a table outside and a strong wind blows. If you happen to have a small hole in your pocket, you might lose the quarters, but the dollar bill might stay. And if you have 5 dollar bills in your pocket, that’s insignificant, but you wouldn’t want to keep 20 quarters in your pocket for very long.
Actually I’m satisfied with your response. Because it makes sense, people without the money shouldn’t purchase whole life. We only tell our clients if they can afford it to purchase it. That’s common sense. And if you need something that will take care of your expenses when you are gone and don’t have a lot of money, then term is the way to go. If you have the money whole life is a good tool for tax diversification. But there is too much to talk about that those of us that are in the industry and are actually licensed to help people in these areas and it would take up too much space. We’d be having this discussion for months. But you make valid points, but to say whole life is a bad investment just seems wrong, because of the percentage of people that can use it, it works perfect. I have a friend who makes $80,000 a month who recently came into oil and was discouraged by blogs like this. After I explained to her how ridiculous blogs like this are for her situation she was actually calm and more receptive. I appreciate you informing the public. And in our jobs we do that well enough, I think instead of trying to be Dave Ramsey, you should just title it, “Why Whole Life is a Bad investment for the average Joe or 98% of the population.
Premiums paid by a policyholder are not deductible from taxable income, although premiums paid via an approved pension fund registered in terms of the Income Tax Act are permitted to be deducted from personal income tax (whether these premiums are nominally being paid by the employer or employee). The benefits arising from life assurance policies are generally not taxable as income to beneficiaries (again in the case of approved benefits, these fall under retirement or withdrawal taxation rules from SARS). Investment return within the policy will be taxed within the life policy and paid by the life assurer depending on the nature of the policyholder (whether natural person, company-owned, untaxed or a retirement fund).
Captive insurance companies may be defined as limited-purpose insurance companies established with the specific objective of financing risks emanating from their parent group or groups. This definition can sometimes be extended to include some of the risks of the parent company's customers. In short, it is an in-house self-insurance vehicle. Captives may take the form of a "pure" entity (which is a 100% subsidiary of the self-insured parent company); of a "mutual" captive (which insures the collective risks of members of an industry); and of an "association" captive (which self-insures individual risks of the members of a professional, commercial or industrial association). Captives represent commercial, economic and tax advantages to their sponsors because of the reductions in costs they help create and for the ease of insurance risk management and the flexibility for cash flows they generate. Additionally, they may provide coverage of risks which is neither available nor offered in the traditional insurance market at reasonable prices.
I only read the first couple of paragraphs here but so far what you are talking about is universal insurance, not whole life. Whole life builds cash value but the policy holder doesn’t get that money….they can take it out on a loan but they have to pay it back with a small interest rate…the cash value a whole life policy collects is what keeps the policy going and it is why they are able to pay out everything they promised you. No one anywhere ever would say hey how about you pay me ten dollars and I will give you twenty in a week….the whole life policy builds up cash value and between that and your premiums they are able to make the money to cover the whole cost. Term life is exactly what its name says…it only last for a term and will be terminated within a set period of time (usually like 20 years) so when you buy it at 20 and live till 50 you don’t get the money you just paid almost 2,000 a year for nothing….but whole life has to pay out it covers you for your whole life. The reason that the term is so much cheaper is that statistically the person will not die in that set time so they are able to make money off the people who don’t die to cover the select few that do and when you are 50 trying to buy term it is crazy expensive. Everyone has their own opinions and I understand that I am just 99% sure that you are talking about universal insurance which is a mix of term and whole and will soon be illegal because of how shady it is.
The “fixed returns” you talk about from whole life are not the 4-6% you mention in multiple places. Again, as I said in the post, the guaranteed returns are much closer to 1% or less. Yes you might get better returns depending on the dividends the insurance company decides to pay, but that’s not “fixed” or guaranteed. It changes every year. And yes, you can improve those refunds if you vastly overfund the policy in the early years, which again is something I already mentioned in the post. But for 98-99% of the population that really isn’t a viable strategy.

Insurance Comparison Company


Still, although I believe that persons without adequate income either to fund adequately retirement vehicles or to pay monthly bills without using a home equity line of credit or leaving any credit card balances unpaid, should probably only purchase term insurance, if you earn more than that, I am thinking that purchasing 15% to 25% of needed life insurance coverage though whole life policies may be a way to mitigate against the needed guessing that goes into picking the length and amount of term policies. Do you agree?

After insurance has been selected and purchased, most insurance brokers will continue to provide service to their clients. This includes advising clients on technical issues that may be helpful in the event that a client has to file a claim, helping clients decide if they should change their insurance policies or coverage, and even making sure that clients comply with their policy’s requirements.

Insurance Solutions Co


The primary purpose of life insurance is to protect the people who are financially dependent upon you. Once those people are no longer dependent upon you (e.g. your kids grow up), you no longer have the need for that protection. Term life insurance is like having car insurance for as long as you own a car. Whole life insurance is like having car insurance forever, even when you no longer own a car.
The “fixed returns” you talk about from whole life are not the 4-6% you mention in multiple places. Again, as I said in the post, the guaranteed returns are much closer to 1% or less. Yes you might get better returns depending on the dividends the insurance company decides to pay, but that’s not “fixed” or guaranteed. It changes every year. And yes, you can improve those refunds if you vastly overfund the policy in the early years, which again is something I already mentioned in the post. But for 98-99% of the population that really isn’t a viable strategy.
The best part of the cash value? You have access to it at any time, for any reason, without taxes or penalties. This is probably the best benefit of whole life and is what is most attractive to my high net clients who are already maximizing contributions to IRA’s, 401k’s etc. Also, whole life does not carry the same penalties for withdrawals as these other accounts do

Home insurance

×