Wow, what a great article, Matt. A couple of nights ago, I was listening to Clark Howard on the radio, and to my dismay, heard him start talking about one of the worst investments for college. He continued, and when he actually said whole life insurance, my heart dropped, because about ten years ago, my wife and I were talked into this “investment” for paying for our kids college.
Finally, if you’ve already handled all of your other financial goals and you still have disposable income leftover and you want to use that money to buy a permanent life insurance policy that will leave an inheritance for your children, by all means go ahead and do so. But the vast majority of people will never be in that situation, and even if you are in that situation you will likely want a policy that’s specifically tailored to minimize fees and accomplish the goals you want to accomplish. Most whole life insurance policies will still be inefficient and unnecessarily expensive.
The comparison for defined contribution vs registered accounts is easier because you are dealing with account values which you can project with a fair degree of certainty, at least within ranges to which you can apply confidence intervals, to the degree market activity can be reliably subjected to statistics (point of contention: this is debatable…otherwise we wouldn’t have return years with standard deviations of 3+). You just project the accumulation and the withdrawal and see which one runs out of money first, then consider the non-financial issues already discussed above. Comparing defined benefit plans vs registered accounts is a little bit tougher. This is where you might want to bring in your accountant or actuary to do the math. They can provide you with the information you need to make the decision.
After reading the entire thread, couldn’t help but add my thoughts. I am a civilian here so no affiliation as an insurance salesman or financial planner in any capacity. I am however, an owner of a WL policy (one year in) which I got through a friend in the business. I admittedly jumped into this without doing the proper due diligence as more of a favor to him. I have had anxiety about this decision since, and am days away from my second annual premium payment and have thus spent a great deal of time researching and thinking about the implications of this asset. I am at a “cut my losses and run crossroads”. Is this a quality asset, or do I cut and run and chalk-up the loss as the cost of a lesson learned in letting others do my independent thinking for me (two implications here are that 1) I do believe that the person who sold me this actually believes in the products and 2) that doesn’t mean that he is right and any person, no matter how financially savvy, who is willing to dedicate the time, can do the research and come up with their own view). I say all of this to admit that I am biased, even if only sub-consciously, as I have tried to think in a balanced manner with regards to this decision. All of that being said, I am currently leaning towards keeping the asset in place and welcome thoughts. My current logic below.
Property insurance provides protection against risks to property, such as fire, theft or weather damage. This may include specialized forms of insurance such as fire insurance, flood insurance, earthquake insurance, home insurance, inland marine insurance or boiler insurance. The term property insurance may, like casualty insurance, be used as a broad category of various subtypes of insurance, some of which are listed below:
All points have merit but, like any service, unprofessional service can be punished by walking. However, point #4, “market blocking” is a particularly confounding practice in P&C (I don’t think this occurs in LIfe & Health). Market blocking is a matter which Insurance Commissioners could easily correct nationwide to the immediate benefit of the customer.