It is possible for a non-working spouse to get disability insurance but there are not many companies which offer it. Do a search for "Spousal Coverage" & "Disability Insurance" and you'll find which companies offer it.
I sell life insurance and I'm a financial advisor. I once got a call from a PolicyGenius agent after I filled out some info online, pretending to be an uneducated consumer. I used the financial data and age of my fiance (who earns more than I do) as a stand in for my own data. My experiment was to see how good their knowledge and customer service was. I asked some questions which should have been easy for a licensed broker to answer. Sadly, the agent was woefully lacking in knowledge and strategies for owning life insurance. I would steer clear of PolicyGenius and choose to work with someone whom you know and has been in the business for at least 5-10 years.
I'd like to offer a clarification: the writer says that with whole life insurance part of the premium paid goes to "fund an investment account." This is NOT correct. The writer confuses "whole life" with "perminent" life insurance. With traditional cash value whole life, part of the premium goes to build up a SAVINGS account. An "investment" account inplies that there is inherent risk in how the premium is allocated. With cash value whole life, there is no risk, The rate of return is fixed contractualy. The value of the cash will increase each year regardless of market or interest rates. Additionally, if the insurer is a mutual insurance company, there is the opportunity to benefit from the insurance company's success via annual dividends (which are not guaranteed.) What the writer may be thinking of is UNIVERSAL life policies which, depending on the type (Indexed, Variable etc.) take some on some risk with the money which comes in from premiums paid. The key thing to know about universal life policies is that there are certain types of risk which are transferred from the insurance company to the policy holder in order for the policy to work.
Financial advisor here. I find it amusing that of all the comments so far, the focus is on fees and returns. That's all fine and good, but the best advisors also manage people's behaviors and act as dispassionate stewards of people's money. Don't sell this part short. If the writer has an advisor they like and trust (for over 20 years!) then I'd say they are in a pretty good spot. Now, as a husband & wife approach retirement, the conversation shifts (which it should have started doing 10-15 years ago) from the accumulation phase to the distribution phase. And these two phases of life require VERY different strategies. Is your advisor speaking to you about how you can reduce effectivec tax rates in the future? Is your advisor discussing estate planning strategies? Is your advisor talking with you about how you might handle a future need like on-going custodial care when one or both of you become inable to look after yourselves? What about social security claiming strategies? If you are one or two years away from retiring and you advisor has NOT initiated these discussions, you may want to shop around for a new advisor. Notice that none of what I say is focused on AUM or fees.
While I agree 100% that no one will ever care about your money as much as you do that comes with a huge correlary: We all get emotional with our money and hiring someone to make sure we aren't the ones who torpedo our our own portfolios (because of fear or exuberance for ex.) around markets, is the best reason to work with an advisor. As we live our lives it is unlikely that most people with money will ever be as dispassionate abour investments as someone who gets compensated for helping people follow an agreed upon plan and there's no way people who are not working in personal finance will be familiar with all the tools, tricks and products which are available in the market.
That was my thought as well. The author never talks about why they got life insurance in the first place and, once they surrendered the policies they bought, if they replaced it with either term or whole life. Each has it's pros and cons and universal life isn't always a bad deal if it's explained right (ex. life insurance is never an "investment" but it can be a great asset on one's balance sheet.
Hi, I'm half Brit and my partner is English. I know the UK better than most Americans and can tell you that we in the US who truly understand the American psyche do NOT cotton to the very feudalistic notion that the "state" must take care of it's citizens. That's one of the most significant differences between the European mentality bourne out of feudalism (no wonder communism is a European construct) and that of the US (which is a rejection of paternalism and a robust recognition of the the individual above all else.)
"not sbusidized by general debt-funded revenue"? Benefits have exceeded social secuirty income since 2021 and the "trust fund" is an accounting mirage created by creative minds (minds that truthfully, are untrustworthy.) One way (not the only way, to be sure) to improve SS is to give people the option to invest a portion of their SS money themselves in an account governed by rules with a smidgen of flexibility but with a heavy dose of regulation. For example, give workers the abilty to "cash out" in the case of say a crippling medical situation or to purchase something which creates generational wealth (such as a home or a whole life insurance policy) but allow only a narrow band of target date investments to be appproved and utilized. We must create a new generation of individuals who are gently nudged to take control of their finances and think long term. This is a decades long goal which makes sense since this is a decades long in the making problem
No. I am generous with my own money. I am not generous with other people's money. People who say they are willing to pay higher taxes are people who often have enough money to sheild their money from the tax man (in the forms of trusts and paying accountants to find the loopholes which always exist in the tax laws.)
Some people will see "simplification" in your suggestions. Others, like me, will see "less choice." And, no, your first idea is not socialism. But it does amount to increased moral hazard. Is there any doubt that social security has contributed to many people's belief that "I don't really need to save, I have social security that I can count on?" Fact is, the way the US government runs its fisc, only fools have confidence in trusting the government to not take in more money and waste it on needless programs. No, let's NOT give the government more "responsibility" of people's finances and give people MORE responsiblity for their income.
Comments
It is possible for a non-working spouse to get disability insurance but there are not many companies which offer it. Do a search for "Spousal Coverage" & "Disability Insurance" and you'll find which companies offer it.
Post: Answers About Life
Link to comment from October 22, 2024
I sell life insurance and I'm a financial advisor. I once got a call from a PolicyGenius agent after I filled out some info online, pretending to be an uneducated consumer. I used the financial data and age of my fiance (who earns more than I do) as a stand in for my own data. My experiment was to see how good their knowledge and customer service was. I asked some questions which should have been easy for a licensed broker to answer. Sadly, the agent was woefully lacking in knowledge and strategies for owning life insurance. I would steer clear of PolicyGenius and choose to work with someone whom you know and has been in the business for at least 5-10 years.
Post: Answers About Life
Link to comment from October 22, 2024
I'd like to offer a clarification: the writer says that with whole life insurance part of the premium paid goes to "fund an investment account." This is NOT correct. The writer confuses "whole life" with "perminent" life insurance. With traditional cash value whole life, part of the premium goes to build up a SAVINGS account. An "investment" account inplies that there is inherent risk in how the premium is allocated. With cash value whole life, there is no risk, The rate of return is fixed contractualy. The value of the cash will increase each year regardless of market or interest rates. Additionally, if the insurer is a mutual insurance company, there is the opportunity to benefit from the insurance company's success via annual dividends (which are not guaranteed.) What the writer may be thinking of is UNIVERSAL life policies which, depending on the type (Indexed, Variable etc.) take some on some risk with the money which comes in from premiums paid. The key thing to know about universal life policies is that there are certain types of risk which are transferred from the insurance company to the policy holder in order for the policy to work.
Post: Six Tips on Term Life
Link to comment from October 22, 2024
Financial advisor here. I find it amusing that of all the comments so far, the focus is on fees and returns. That's all fine and good, but the best advisors also manage people's behaviors and act as dispassionate stewards of people's money. Don't sell this part short. If the writer has an advisor they like and trust (for over 20 years!) then I'd say they are in a pretty good spot. Now, as a husband & wife approach retirement, the conversation shifts (which it should have started doing 10-15 years ago) from the accumulation phase to the distribution phase. And these two phases of life require VERY different strategies. Is your advisor speaking to you about how you can reduce effectivec tax rates in the future? Is your advisor discussing estate planning strategies? Is your advisor talking with you about how you might handle a future need like on-going custodial care when one or both of you become inable to look after yourselves? What about social security claiming strategies? If you are one or two years away from retiring and you advisor has NOT initiated these discussions, you may want to shop around for a new advisor. Notice that none of what I say is focused on AUM or fees.
Post: Finding a flat-fee financial advisor
Link to comment from October 22, 2024
While I agree 100% that no one will ever care about your money as much as you do that comes with a huge correlary: We all get emotional with our money and hiring someone to make sure we aren't the ones who torpedo our our own portfolios (because of fear or exuberance for ex.) around markets, is the best reason to work with an advisor. As we live our lives it is unlikely that most people with money will ever be as dispassionate abour investments as someone who gets compensated for helping people follow an agreed upon plan and there's no way people who are not working in personal finance will be familiar with all the tools, tricks and products which are available in the market.
Post: My Money Education
Link to comment from October 23, 2023
That was my thought as well. The author never talks about why they got life insurance in the first place and, once they surrendered the policies they bought, if they replaced it with either term or whole life. Each has it's pros and cons and universal life isn't always a bad deal if it's explained right (ex. life insurance is never an "investment" but it can be a great asset on one's balance sheet.
Post: My Money Education
Link to comment from October 23, 2023
Hi, I'm half Brit and my partner is English. I know the UK better than most Americans and can tell you that we in the US who truly understand the American psyche do NOT cotton to the very feudalistic notion that the "state" must take care of it's citizens. That's one of the most significant differences between the European mentality bourne out of feudalism (no wonder communism is a European construct) and that of the US (which is a rejection of paternalism and a robust recognition of the the individual above all else.)
Post: Retirement Do-Over
Link to comment from October 14, 2023
"not sbusidized by general debt-funded revenue"? Benefits have exceeded social secuirty income since 2021 and the "trust fund" is an accounting mirage created by creative minds (minds that truthfully, are untrustworthy.) One way (not the only way, to be sure) to improve SS is to give people the option to invest a portion of their SS money themselves in an account governed by rules with a smidgen of flexibility but with a heavy dose of regulation. For example, give workers the abilty to "cash out" in the case of say a crippling medical situation or to purchase something which creates generational wealth (such as a home or a whole life insurance policy) but allow only a narrow band of target date investments to be appproved and utilized. We must create a new generation of individuals who are gently nudged to take control of their finances and think long term. This is a decades long goal which makes sense since this is a decades long in the making problem
Post: Retirement Do-Over
Link to comment from October 14, 2023
No. I am generous with my own money. I am not generous with other people's money. People who say they are willing to pay higher taxes are people who often have enough money to sheild their money from the tax man (in the forms of trusts and paying accountants to find the loopholes which always exist in the tax laws.)
Post: Retirement Do-Over
Link to comment from October 12, 2023
Some people will see "simplification" in your suggestions. Others, like me, will see "less choice." And, no, your first idea is not socialism. But it does amount to increased moral hazard. Is there any doubt that social security has contributed to many people's belief that "I don't really need to save, I have social security that I can count on?" Fact is, the way the US government runs its fisc, only fools have confidence in trusting the government to not take in more money and waste it on needless programs. No, let's NOT give the government more "responsibility" of people's finances and give people MORE responsiblity for their income.
Post: Retirement Do-Over
Link to comment from October 12, 2023