English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I have search only 2 big compnay Metlife and New York Life.
I am 24 years old and want that whole life insurance for my life.
So i want to know which compnay i need to choose for whole life insurance.... Metlife or New York Life ?
I have quote from metlife Insurance...Agent told me my premium payment gonna be $3510.00 per anuual for $500,000.00 ( insurance amount). and i am 24 yeras old it has cash value too..
So i need some information from ur side...should i take it or ?

2007-07-30 11:26:02 · 0 answers · asked by God Bless You 2 in Business & Finance Insurance

0 answers

I agree with the individual who advised you to buy a term life insurance policy and then invest the difference between what the term policy will cost and what the whole life policy would have cost you. Whole life policies are more expensive than term policies because part of your premium is going to pay for insurance and part is going to the "cash value."

However, what most whole life agents don't tell you, and I noticed the first individual who answered your question also neglected to mention to you, is that if you have a whole life policy and you pass away, your beneficiary gets either the amount of the death benefit OR whatever is in your cash value. The beneficiary will not get both. Does this seem fair to you? I mean, you paid for both, so your beneficiary should receive both, right? Rarely will there be a way for them to get both in a whole life policy and if there is a way, then that type of provision will make your premiums even more expensive. No one wants that, right?

Also, there are four funny rules about whole life insurance you should know about. The first one is they keep your money for the first 3 years. So for the first 3 years, your cash value will not gain anything because most of your premium for that amount of time will be paying the agent's fat commission check. Second, they keep your money if you die. I explained this above when I noted that should you pass away, your beneficiary receives either the death benefit or the amount in the cash value. Third, the cash value's rate of return is very low, approximately 1-3% is the rate at what your money is growing. Finally, I'm sure the Metlife agent told you that you could borrow against the cash value. Well, while that cash value grows at 1-3%, if you take out a loan against the cash value, you will be hit with a 6-8% interest rate to borrow your own money! You get charged to borrow your own money. You wouldn't do business with a bank that charged you to withdraw money from your account would you? So why do business with an insurance company that would do something like that?

Yes, buy a term policy and invest the difference between what the term costs and what the whole life costs. Invest this difference into a Roth IRA. Roths have favorable tax treatment in that since they are funded with after tax dollars, you are not taxed when you pull the money out much later in life at retirement. If you buy term and do this, now if something happens to you, your beneficiary will get BOTH the death benefit from your life insurance policy AND whatever your investment had grown to. This is more fair, right? You funded both...and now your beneficiary will get both. Buy term for the amount of time you will have your major responsibilities like mortgage, any debts, and funding children's education as the case may be and also invest during that time.

My goal here was not necessarily to convince you not to buy whole life insurance, but I must admit I sincerely hope I have done so. And if not, then I have at least done no harm and maybe even told you some things you didn't know before.

Again, buy term and invest the difference, those whom you leave behind when you pass will be very greatful.

2007-07-30 18:02:40 · answer #1 · answered by puckfreak02 3 · 1 2

Whole Life is very expensive and makes no sense for most of us. The "Cash value" is a joke. You could buy term, invest the balance and have thousands of $$$ more by age 65 (with better tax treatment).

The fees in whole life policies make them a favorite for the agents. It is not uncommon for the agents to earn 90% or more of the first years premium. The companies can afford to do this because the policies are so profitable.

In many states it's illigal to sell "Whole Life Policies" as investments.

I'd suggest a 30 year guaranteed term policy. It guarantees a low rate (several hundred dollars a year, in your case). The thinking is.....
A. By the time you've reached 30 years the obligations you bought the policy for are no longer there (ie., pay for house).
B. From an investment point of view...... the balance not spent on the premium can be diverted to "real" investments.

Most people that work for the big life insurance companies are honest & fine people (I worked for NY Life 15 years ago). But I found there are major "wholes" in their teaching practices to the agents. What's worse, many agents are just not as "financially savy" as they may appear.

Spend a few months and read as much as you can. Don't regret this 10 years from now.

Best of luck!

2007-07-30 15:50:28 · answer #2 · answered by Common Sense 7 · 2 2

GBY, Your best bet is to meet with several agents and discuss your situation. There are several strategies that can help you achieve your goals and different insurance and investment products that can help. No one on a web message board can tell you which one is right for you.

Buying term CAN work but if you have the need for permanent insurance, term is not the answer. You could have a special needs child that will need care throughout his/her life. If so, term is inappropriate. There are other needs for permanent insurance too.

Keep in mind that you can own both Term and permanent insurance. I do.

Good Luck

*

2007-07-31 01:48:35 · answer #3 · answered by insuranceguytx 5 · 2 1

They key word in the “buy term life, not whole life” scenario is “could,” as in “You could buy term, invest the balance and have thousands of $$$ more by age 65.” That assumes a lot. It assumes that you 1) Will take the initiative to save and invest (most people don’t despite their best intentions); 2) You choose your investments wisely; 3) Your investments pay off. It’s all iffy. Whole life is a guaranteed, tax-free investment. And you get your insurance and investment in one low premium (try investing $20 a month with a stock broker).

There are other whole life companies. The best way to find them is to contact an insurance broker. A broker works with multiple insurance companies and knows how to obtain the best policy for your needs. To find a reputable broker in your area, log on to a site like http://www.lifeinsurancewiz.com and complete the “request a quote” form. The form will go to a broker in your area who will contact you. The quote is free, and you are not obligated to buy. Good luck!

2007-07-31 12:11:24 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

OK, well, they're both great companies, but why the HECK are you throwing away your money on whole life? The "cash value" will build at about 10% of what you're paying into it. It's a BAD savings plan.

Go to a local, independent agent, and get quotes from LOTS of other companies .. . they can give you 8 - 10 quotes at once. AND explain the different policy types, to see which one REALLY meets your current financial goals.

2007-07-31 08:04:54 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous 7 · 0 2

Great point, but I'm not 100%

2016-07-30 00:27:12 · answer #6 · answered by Marnie 3 · 0 0

Interesting question!

2016-08-24 10:24:31 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers