Jump to content

Joe

Members
  • Posts

    16,717
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    15

Posts posted by Joe

  1. 15 hours ago, SilentWorld said:

     

     

    I'm surprised that you're pushing back so much on this (going as far as to call that other dude a liar). I thought it was common knowledge that insurance salesmen get paid on commission and are considered to be one step above used car salesmen (or below depending on who you're asking) . 

     

    Here you go:

     

     

    In general, whole life insurance is a TERRIBLE idea if there's any possibility you will cancel the policy in the short term (if you cancel in the short term there are significant fees that pretty much eat up the whole value of the policy)... pretty bad if you might cancel the policy in the medium term (if you cancel after 10 years, you'll basically get your principal back)... and borderline ok* if you 100% know you'll keep the policy for 20+ years.

     

    The main benefits of a whole life policy are tax sheltered growth, and the fact that life insurance payouts are not subject to estate tax. So, for very wealthy people, whole life goes from being "borderline ok" to a pretty good idea. 

     

    *Whole life is a bundled product -- life insurance PLUS an investment product. When I say it's borderline ok, what I mean is this: After 20 years, you'll end up with a cash value roughly about the same as if you had taken your premiums SUBTRACTED the premiums of a term 20 life insurance policy and invested the remainder in bonds. So... when I say it's borderline ok, that's ONLY true if you actually want/need life insurance. If you don't need/want it, then you'd be better off investing the cost of the premium elsewhere. My sister bought whole life on her freaking baby! What a stupid idea! Why does a baby need life insurance. 

     

    Not everyone is a pure  life insurance agent. Some work as financial planners and some work as fee for consultation brokers. The latter still recommend whole life because it's a great part of a diversified portfolio. The reason I push back is because he said the commission came out of the product, which I have yet to see any evidence of. That's just disingenuous.

     

    https://www.thebalance.com/stocks-vs-bonds-the-long-term-performance-data-416861

     

    Anyway, here's a link talking about bonds. To say that bonds perform better than whole life even after using part of the bond to buy term is again a falsehood. Bonds perform very similarly yo whole life, but without an added death benefit to protect your family. 

  2. Mine just went away after doing stretches every day.  I do that stretch where you plant the leg that contains the foot in question back and with your other leg bent you lunge forward slowly. I do this against a wall. Make sure the back leg is STRAIGHT, don't bend it. Hold for 30 seconds and repeat 3 times each day. Not sure if this works for everyone but it worked great for me.

  3. 2 hours ago, monkk said:

    I'm showing you the big picture. 80% of fees in the first year and 6% for each additional year is destroying earnings potential.

     

    Where do you think the insurance company gets the money to give to their agents? Oh, from their clients.

     

    Never time the market. I could quote a hundred people who said 2014 was a bubble, and 2016, and 2017... If you didn't invest you would have missed the gains. Productivity increasing isn't likely to stop any time soon. The return of the stock market over the last 100 years is 10%. 7% Real.

     

     

    Why is this so sticky to you? Do you make money selling insurance? Have you invested a large amount into WLI and don't want to hear that you wasted it? Do you have a very conservative approach to life and can't bear risk?

     

     

     

    Again, we are talking about diversification here. Whole life isnt supposed to compete with high return investments (although it carries none of the risk of a high return investment). It behaves more similarly to bonds, which are a part of nearly everyone's well-diversified portfolio.  The difference being that bonds dip sometimes as well, where as whole life never will. Not to mention the added death benefit.

  4. 54 minutes ago, monkk said:

    Yes, I registered 7 years ago because I knew eventually my time would come that I could make this post.

     

    https://www.nerdwallet.com/blog/insurance/life-insurance-agent-commissions/

     

    If you need life insurance, get term. If you have extra money left over, put it in an index fund that charges less than .2% in fees.

     

    Here is why fees matter: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/retirement/etc/tyranny.html

     

    If you are paying just 2% in fees per year, the company keeps 66% of your money and you only keep 33% of the pot long-term.

     

    Why did you link a study that decries mutual funds? When did I ever recommend mutual funds? Also, it's funny that you recommend investing in Vanguard and then post a link to a study created by the founder of Vanguard.

     

    Also, your 8% RoR is a fairy tale. The market is way up and everyone knows it. Recommending someone investing in a Vanguard ETF right now is downright terrible advice. The OP even mentioned his hesitancy to invest in this wild environment.

     

    Moving on, whole life insurance charges $0 fees to the client. The life insurance company compensates the agent, not the client. Unlike investing in a Vanguard ETF, you are GUARANTEED 4% and it will likely to better than that. Try getting a guarantee from your Vanguard account.

  5. 6 minutes ago, monkk said:

    You just lost all credibility with me. Whole Life is just about never a good idea. If you were sold a WL policy, it it because they earn your salesman is earning 80% of your first years cost and only cares about your money.

     

    Did you just register to make this post? That 80% number is a blatant lie and anyway, you need to provide an actual reason as for why it is a bad idea other than a made up commission number.

×
×
  • Create New...