QUOTE 27 MALE

Aug 6, 2019

  1. Robert Barney
    Offline

    Robert Barney Guru

    Posts:
    1,345
    Likes Received:
    174
    I looked but I don't see anyone mentioning Banner's new 40 year term. I wouldn't buy $100,000, the premium for a non-smoker ranges from 218.36 to 333.14. He can get $250,000 for 328.38 to 594.93.

    That's guaranteed level coverage, with guaranteed level premiums, to age 67.
     
  2. Tahoe Ray
    Offline

    Tahoe Ray Guru

    Posts:
    2,915
    Likes Received:
    627
    State:
    Nevada
    You don't see term mentioned because OP wants permanent coverage.
     
  3. myinsurebiz
    Offline

    myinsurebiz Guru

    Posts:
    4,834
    Likes Received:
    745
    State:
    Hawaii
    CFG
     
  4. Robert Barney
    Offline

    Robert Barney Guru

    Posts:
    1,345
    Likes Received:
    174
  5. pfg1
    Offline

    pfg1 Guru

    Posts:
    1,553
    Likes Received:
    339
    State:
    Virginia

    Fixed it for you ^^^^ :biggrin:

    While I agree that most young folks should have adequate coverage first and foremost (and that is often done through level term) - there are no absolutes, and everyone's situation, wants, and needs are different.
    I don't agree that only PLI should be used if the end result is the client having less coverage than is needed. Often, a combination of term & perm can be a great solution.
     
    pfg1, Aug 10, 2019
    #25
  6. Robert Barney
    Offline

    Robert Barney Guru

    Posts:
    1,345
    Likes Received:
    174
    Gonna have to disagree. Bought two 15 year First Colony term plans on my two kids in college in 1999; both were single. The product allowed a 10th year conversion to 30 year term, at the 1999 prices for their attained age. That was 40 years of level coverage. If I was in the same situation today, I would have bought them Banner 40 year.

    At the time I got them both preferred rates. Neither could qualify for preferred today, but they both have the $300,000 (the maximum they would sell me) and it gets both of them through their child raising responsibilities.

    I owned the policies, I paid the premiums, I was the beneficiary. They came to me after they were married and I said I would be happy to give them the policies right after they had they spouses insured for at least the same amount, and told them the policies were not big enough if they started having kids.

    A typical parent today, would need 10 times (minimum) to about 15 times (maximum) of their gross income to be properly insured. You can't afford that buying permanent. And I would never recommend compromising coverage to get a more expensive policy. If they have money for premiums beyond that (about 3% of them maybe) then a permanent policy would be fine. I bought my permanent policies in my mid 30's, after I had been fully funding retirement contributions (10% per year) and had paid down a considerable portion of my mortgage.

    A 27 year old has about 3 circumstances.

    1. Married with children - need the coverage NOW.

    2. Married without children - doesn't really need coverage but needs to protect the right to buy coverage and to buy it for 30 (minimum) to 40 years (maximum). Best advice, pretend you have children and buy that term now.

    3. Single. Really needs NO insurance. If they think they MIGHT get married, see 2 then see 1.

    I feel VERY sorry for widows with children who receive life insurance benefit checks that will not produce sufficient income to maintain their current lifestyle until the children are adults. I don't feel sorry for the agent if they come up short, there's another emotion that comes to mind.
     
  7. WinoBlues
    Offline

    WinoBlues Guru

    Posts:
    19,535
    Likes Received:
    3,246
    State:
    California
Loading...