At the age of 26 what type of life insurance policy would be best... lifetermuniversaletc.
Total Comments: 18
Posted: Sat Jan 16, 2010 04:34 am Post Subject:
No where near enough information to answer this question with any degree of authority.
We'd have to get into things like...
Do you have dependents?
Do you carry any debts?
What's your marital status?
Are you carrying for someone (parent)?
This is not an exhaustive list.
Maybe the answer is you don't need any at all. Maybe the answer is you could start with some to get you off in the right direction?
There isn't a right type of life insurance for someone at a given age.
Posted: Sat Jan 16, 2010 02:00 pm Post Subject:
The amount is always more important than type.
Posted: Sat Jan 16, 2010 02:09 pm Post Subject:
The amount is always more important than type.
I tend to disagree with this statment..why?..because you don't want to get the "cheapest insurance" and have it cover almost nothing..ya know? I've seen people get Life Insurance,..the cheapest they could. Actually, I think it was just Accidental Death, this certain person got. She didn't really pay attention to what the Agent was telling her about the coverage. From what I understand, she tried to get the 'cash value', of the policy, and she was told she couldn't do that. Don't just assume every policy is the same....do some research on what you're looking for, and THEN compare the prices.
Posted: Sat Jan 16, 2010 03:01 pm Post Subject:
Ok what do I know I sell for (deleted by mod-lori) . I sell over the phone and accidental life is one of my big products. GOOO JETTTS!!! J E T S JETS! (NO links in posts! read the TOU-at the bottom of the page)
Posted: Sun Jan 17, 2010 12:57 am Post Subject:
Yeah, it doesn't follow that amount is always more important than type. Making rule of thumb statements like that shows a degree of inexperience in true practice. Nothing will always be the way to go. Of course, when you sell things over the phone, it's hard to see how things wind up.
Posted: Sun Jan 17, 2010 03:01 pm Post Subject:
I don't sell accident policies over the phone. I will stand by my statement that amount is always more important than type with the caveat that I am not talking about accident policies. I'm specifically talking about policies that pay regardless of how death occurs.
If you die today, it is immaterial to your wife whether you have WL, Term, UL, VUL, IUL, etc. All that matters is the amount.
Posted: Sun Jan 17, 2010 11:56 pm Post Subject:
Guest 1 you couldn't be more wrong. You have to take the situation in to play. If a 26 year old buys a term policy whether it be 10,20,30 year level when it comes time of renewal and this insured is now unhealthy, they could have a problem converting to permanent. Remember I said could, because not all term policies are convertible without evidence of insurability. Therefore maybe this insured needs to have a combination of term and permanent which would not provide the highest amount possible, but protect from the unseen. Do not make statements that the amount is what matters. I think you should stick with selling your accident insurance and leave these questions for the professionals.
Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 09:23 am Post Subject:
BNTRS has given a most appropriate answer. The associated factors of financial responsibility to those left behind are far more important than mere age or type of policy. That's the true purpose of most life policies.
Any talk of "Accidental Death benefits" does not belong in the discussion, as this is not genuine life insurance. A true life insurance policy is generally unconcerned with the manner of death (suicide within the first one or two years depending on state law where the policy was issued, or other specific exclusions in a contract aside).
As for convertibility of a term policy, a responsible life agent should only be marketing convertible (and renewable) term. Any insurer who "upcharges" for such provisions does a disservice to its policyholders because it costs them absolutely nothing to make those features available. A renewed policy will always cost more due to age, and a converted policy will always cost more due to both age AND the fact that, aside from a Primerica term policy, conversion will be to a more costly permanent policy such as WL or UL, depending on what the insurer chooses to make available for conversions.
In either case (renewal or conversion), the insurer gets the greater cash flow it desires despite the potential risk of having to cover the occasional "uninsurable" insured -- the one who's health status would make obtaining a "new" (aka: medically underwritten) policy next to impossible.
Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 11:11 am Post Subject:
I am not saying that things like 10 vs 20 yr vs 30 yr term are not important factors. I'm not saying that type of coverage isn't important. All that I'm saying is that amount of coverage is more important than type of insurance.
Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 02:51 pm Post Subject:
You sound like an A.L. Williams guy! An individual can have 1 million in death benefit but if the product makes itself unaffordable at a later date (when the insured needs it most) what good is it? You have to have three factors, affordability and highest insurance amount, and a suitable product. I know, accident policies would have the highest death benefit for the cost of insurance but the product is worthless if you do not die of an accident. You need to get over selling that product. Sell real products that payoff on death for any reason.
Posted: Sat Jan 16, 2010 04:34 am Post Subject:
No where near enough information to answer this question with any degree of authority.
We'd have to get into things like...
Do you have dependents?
Do you carry any debts?
What's your marital status?
Are you carrying for someone (parent)?
This is not an exhaustive list.
Maybe the answer is you don't need any at all. Maybe the answer is you could start with some to get you off in the right direction?
There isn't a right type of life insurance for someone at a given age.
Posted: Sat Jan 16, 2010 02:00 pm Post Subject:
The amount is always more important than type.
Posted: Sat Jan 16, 2010 02:09 pm Post Subject:
The amount is always more important than type.
I tend to disagree with this statment..why?..because you don't want to get the "cheapest insurance" and have it cover almost nothing..ya know? I've seen people get Life Insurance,..the cheapest they could. Actually, I think it was just Accidental Death, this certain person got. She didn't really pay attention to what the Agent was telling her about the coverage. From what I understand, she tried to get the 'cash value', of the policy, and she was told she couldn't do that. Don't just assume every policy is the same....do some research on what you're looking for, and THEN compare the prices.Posted: Sat Jan 16, 2010 03:01 pm Post Subject:
Ok what do I know I sell for (deleted by mod-lori) . I sell over the phone and accidental life is one of my big products. GOOO JETTTS!!! J E T S JETS! (NO links in posts! read the TOU-at the bottom of the page)
Posted: Sun Jan 17, 2010 12:57 am Post Subject:
Yeah, it doesn't follow that amount is always more important than type. Making rule of thumb statements like that shows a degree of inexperience in true practice. Nothing will always be the way to go. Of course, when you sell things over the phone, it's hard to see how things wind up.
Posted: Sun Jan 17, 2010 03:01 pm Post Subject:
I don't sell accident policies over the phone. I will stand by my statement that amount is always more important than type with the caveat that I am not talking about accident policies. I'm specifically talking about policies that pay regardless of how death occurs.
If you die today, it is immaterial to your wife whether you have WL, Term, UL, VUL, IUL, etc. All that matters is the amount.
Posted: Sun Jan 17, 2010 11:56 pm Post Subject:
Guest 1 you couldn't be more wrong. You have to take the situation in to play. If a 26 year old buys a term policy whether it be 10,20,30 year level when it comes time of renewal and this insured is now unhealthy, they could have a problem converting to permanent. Remember I said could, because not all term policies are convertible without evidence of insurability. Therefore maybe this insured needs to have a combination of term and permanent which would not provide the highest amount possible, but protect from the unseen. Do not make statements that the amount is what matters. I think you should stick with selling your accident insurance and leave these questions for the professionals.
Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 09:23 am Post Subject:
BNTRS has given a most appropriate answer. The associated factors of financial responsibility to those left behind are far more important than mere age or type of policy. That's the true purpose of most life policies.
Any talk of "Accidental Death benefits" does not belong in the discussion, as this is not genuine life insurance. A true life insurance policy is generally unconcerned with the manner of death (suicide within the first one or two years depending on state law where the policy was issued, or other specific exclusions in a contract aside).
As for convertibility of a term policy, a responsible life agent should only be marketing convertible (and renewable) term. Any insurer who "upcharges" for such provisions does a disservice to its policyholders because it costs them absolutely nothing to make those features available. A renewed policy will always cost more due to age, and a converted policy will always cost more due to both age AND the fact that, aside from a Primerica term policy, conversion will be to a more costly permanent policy such as WL or UL, depending on what the insurer chooses to make available for conversions.
In either case (renewal or conversion), the insurer gets the greater cash flow it desires despite the potential risk of having to cover the occasional "uninsurable" insured -- the one who's health status would make obtaining a "new" (aka: medically underwritten) policy next to impossible.
Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 11:11 am Post Subject:
I am not saying that things like 10 vs 20 yr vs 30 yr term are not important factors. I'm not saying that type of coverage isn't important. All that I'm saying is that amount of coverage is more important than type of insurance.
Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 02:51 pm Post Subject:
You sound like an A.L. Williams guy! An individual can have 1 million in death benefit but if the product makes itself unaffordable at a later date (when the insured needs it most) what good is it? You have to have three factors, affordability and highest insurance amount, and a suitable product. I know, accident policies would have the highest death benefit for the cost of insurance but the product is worthless if you do not die of an accident. You need to get over selling that product. Sell real products that payoff on death for any reason.
Add your comment