Roth IRA on steroids

[DHK]

I have seen people who WANT life insurance for protection and wealth transfer but never as a savings vehicle if there is not a need for the insurance.

Agreed. While life insurance does have some unique aspects to it... if there isn't a primary need for coverage, it's harder to justify.

Although, the longer you have it (15+ years), the better it generally gets.

 

[Golfnut2112]

Agreed. While life insurance does have some unique aspects to it... if there isn't a primary need for coverage, it's harder to justify.

Although, the longer you have it (15+ years), the better it generally gets.

Here we go again lol

How have you been?

 

[DHK]

I've been good. Thanks for asking.

 

[Tahoe Ray]

Agreed. While life insurance does have some unique aspects to it... if there isn't a primary need for coverage, it's harder to justify.

Although, the longer you have it (15+ years), the better it generally gets.

Here we go again lol

How have you been?

Nooooooooo!!!!

I think instead of "Fight Club", we should have a place where knowledgeable posters can battle these concepts out without flaming/personal attacks (you guys don't do that and I love to follow debates when it is strictly academic/philosophical).

I propose we call it "The Octagon" We can even have a "Versus" section.

 

[DHK]

@Golfnut2112 and I have an understanding. He just doesn't approve of using permanent life insurance as a primary long-term savings vehicle - unless and until other qualified plan contributions are met.

It's his values and that's fine.

 

[Tahoe Ray]

@Golfnut2112 and I have an understanding. He just doesn't approve of using permanent life insurance as a primary long-term savings vehicle - unless and until other qualified plan contributions are met.

It's his values and that's fine.

Fair enough.

Still like my idea, though.

In addition to the "like, quote, and top" buttons, we add a "challenge" button and go to the octagon.

Tongue in cheek but it could still be cool...

 

[jerryrut]

I had an interview with a captive company. I was asking about insurance and retirement for 20-40 year olds. I asked this while near the end of the interview when I found out they most definitely do the Project 200 thing.

The agency manager said that an IUL policy was superior--said it was "a Roth IRA on steroids." I couldn't get specifics out of him though when I asked how so.

I don't think he meant having the policy within a Roth IRA, if that is even possible.

So lets say one is putting in maximum contributions to a Roth every year ($6,000) from starting from age 25 into Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (avg 7.31% since 2001 inception, 0.03% expense ratio).

What makes a IUL better than a Roth with the above investment selection? As opposed to said individual buying a term policy and investing most into a Roth?

RUN, really fast

 

[DHK]

Just to share that Walton Rogers, CLU, ChFC called it a "Roth IRA on Steroids" in this MDRT video clip:

10 minutes of favorite sales ideas from two industry greats

 

[Tahoe Ray]

Just to share that Walton Rogers, CLU, ChFC called it a "Roth IRA on Steroids" in this MDRT video clip:

10 minutes of favorite sales ideas from two industry greats

Is he securities licensed?

 

[DHK]

Is he securities licensed?

lol. They both are.

Walton Rogers with New York Life for 35 years and Gene Mahn with MassMutual with 50 years securities experience.