Hi Mr Tan,
I've been reading your website with interest recently, and I noticed that you do not believe in the need for life insurance after the age of 65. I understand your point of view that as the kids have probably grown up already and you are retired with your nest egg funds and no need for the coverage.
However, I have the following view. If I have already saved up enough money for my retirement without the need to surrender my life plan which I started at a young age (thus high coverage and cash value), wouldn't you think it would be better for the family to have that whole sum? I'm assuming life plans cover death up to age 99.
Example, I buy a whole life plan since I'm 21, with death coverage of $200,000. Upon age 65, cash value may be another $200,000. If I do not need the money, I could just leave it there, paying my insurance charges, and assuming I die age 70, my family will have sum assured $200,000 + cash value $200,000, therefore = $400,000 instead of me terminating the policy at age 65, withdraw the money and place in fixed deposits for the next 5 years until iIpass away at age 70?
Please correct me if I'm wrong in any of the assumptions I've made, but what I'm trying to say is that, leaving the money for my next generation through insurance may be another way to look at it instead of the simplistic approach of terminating all my policies once I reach age 65. It should all depends on individuals.
Thanks for your time, and hope to hear your point of view.
REPLY
Please read this blog and watch the video by Suzy Orman
http://tankinlian.blogspot.com/2008/08/susie-orman-on-life-insurance.html
As you have already taken a whole life policy, you can continue with it and leave the proceeds to your children, especially if you have sufficient money to meet your own needs. For young people who are not so well off, it is better to buy term insurance for 20 to 30 years, and invest their savings in a low cost investment fund.
Read this FAQ about continuing with an existing life policy:
http://www.tankinlian.com/faq/exist.html
Thursday, September 04, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Blog Archive
-
▼
2009
(653)
-
▼
July
(93)
- SCMP:Cleaning up the mess after a big player falls...
- SCMP:Tsang's disapproval rating at record high
- Earthquake and tsunami
- Singapore GIC, Temasek, and Transparency
- 6 day detox programme
- True cost of life assurance
- Financial consumers need new watchdog: Obama admin...
- When do You say the Emperor has no clothes
- The New Paper:The real problem? Underwriters hidin...
- Petition to the Prime Minister
- MySudoku Contest 10 July 2009
- Logic9 (Sudoku pocket books)
- Maximise shareholder value
- Low interest rate
- Tiered interest rate
- Ask for investigation report through FIDREC
- The Emperor's Clothes
- Brain Workout in The New Paper
- Serangoon North HUDC Privatisation
- Idling ships clog up Singapore shores
- Rebuttals to editorial in Straits Times
- Issues not addressed by MAS investigation findings...
- Law Suit on DBS High Notes
- Coverage of Lehman cases in Hong Kong
- MySudoku Contest in MyPaper
- A fair solution to the toxic product crisis
- Part Time Work Portal
- Name the Shape Contest
- TKL Intelligence Quiz Contest
- The Standard:Ip supports banks' offer in minibond ...
- Relevance of Animal Farm
- Tyranny and liberty
- Cheyenne does Shape Quiz (2)
- SCMP:SFC does not need to complete all minibond in...
- SCMP:Chief keeps quiet over calls for his resignat...
- A Doctor by Choice, a Businessman by Necessity
- Ban on selling structured notes
- Let your views be heard
- Gathering at Speaker's Corner, 22 Aug at 5 pm
- Section 27 of Financial Adviser's Act
- A fair compensation
- Follow up action on MAS investigation report
- The Standard:Illegal Lehman protest targets Tsang ...
- Singapore bars 10 firms from selling structured no...
- MAS Investigation Findings
- 100 fun and information personality quizzes
- Simplify Internet Banking
- Prevent Mis-selling of Financial Products
- Funds Transfer
- Diverse Views
- A poor return on savings in life insurance
- A note of encouragement
- No-fault motor insurance
- Are we over-reacting to Influence A (H1N1)
- The hidden ugly side of Singapore
- Consumer Finance Protection Agency
- SCMP:Lehman investments recouped
- FISCA Research: Interest Rates on Savings Accounts...
- Cheyenne does the Shape Quiz (T Puzzle)
- Allow lawyers to act on contingency fee
- Automated car
- Gathering in Speaker's Corner in August (4)
- Mis-representation on Credit Linked Notes
- Can you solve these 4 shapes?
- Checks and balances
- ATE (After The Event) Insurance
- Credit cards availabe in Singapore as at 15 May 20...
- Fixed deposit interest rate as at 15 May 2009
- Is this negligence?
- Local Transport Service
- Create jobs to help recovery of Global Economy
- SCAM: A bounced cheque
- Request for another Petition to MAS
- Show of support?
- The Standard:New deal to settle minibond buyback
- Was there an attempt to cheat?
- Gathering at Speaker's Corner in August (3)
- Best use for electric car
- Invest in Singapore Government Securities
- What is cheating?
- Politics of Fear
- Australia: List the names of underlying securities...
- Best fixed deposit rates
- SCMP:Minibond victims try to storm bank in protest...
- MRT train lines to come under a single operator
- Cheating and negligence
- Vista Plan (from Zurich)
- Administration of Justice (2)
- Gathering in Speakers Corner
- Compensation should not solely be based on vulnera...
- SCMP:Policy chief expects march to reflect increas...
- Buying a property - facilities
- Administration of Justice (1)
-
▼
July
(93)
2 comments:
Keeping a WL plan beyond 65 is no longer a need. Your need is better served by a medical H&S and self insurance.
If you WANT to keep it for your next generation it is a WANT.
Not many people are fortunate to have 'wants" like you have because at retirement for most people money always 'no enough'.
This is only the legitimate goal I can think of for WL, a legacy ,the proceed to beneficiaries.
If you think of accumulating more cash value I am afraid you will be shocked to know that your cash value will DECREASE as you hold longer.. Since this is not your goal then hold for next generation.
Mr., I want you to know that WL is not an ideal plan as legacy.It is expensive, very expensive. Did you know that you can use term insurance which can cover till you are 100 years old? It is currently available from a few companies. Isn't it less expensive?
Of course if you should live more than 100 years old then WL is better, but at a very high price.
Better yet... ask your kids to pay the premiums for you after age 65. Afterall they will be the ones reaping the benefits henceforth ;)
Post a Comment