Community Chat

[Abrowneyegirl]

Interesting conversation last night.

It was a beautiful day and there was a large group outside in the neighborhood talking and the topic of life insurance came up as there was a local tragedy where a young father was killed in a 1 car accident.

An older neighbor commented "I hope he had good life insurance..." to which the younger people (under 45) laughed as if she was joking. 

Not one of the young professionals in the group had life insurance outside of what their employers offered them for free.

Most thought life or term life insurance when away with the dinosaurs.  

Their thoughts are you self insure and the government provides the rest.

It was an interesting contrast as the 60+ folks all had insurance salespeople and reps in their day.

The thoughts were that nowadays since both parents work the surviving parent will continue to support the household and in the "old days" the women could not earn enough to support the family.

I personally do not think it is that easy, but it was enlightening.

Have you noticed this change in perception of life insurance?   

[occasionalrain]

I don't think it prudent to be worth more to someone dead than alive.

Another consideration, if you are the beneficiary and the insured in murdered, you become the prime suspect.

[4kitties]

I am very friendly with my neighbors but have never discussed personal finances with them.  So I do not know if they have life insurance or not.

I know my children do.  

[CelticCrafter]

When we were first married we bought Whole Life policies.  At the time we were dumb and didn't realize that meant we would be paying for it for our whole life.....

We took the cash value of it and converted it to a single premium policy.

The cash value bought us more than what the original policy benefit was.

[Bri369]

---

@occasionalrain wrote:

I don't think it prudent to be worth more to someone dead than alive.

Another consideration, if you are the beneficiary and the insured in murdered, you become the prime suspect.

---

I care to think of it as not burdening them with debt.  

No one is worth more dead.  That's very sinister.

[kaydee50]

Don't know if percerptions have changed but unless the employer's insurance is signficant, I don't think it's a good idea not to have a term life insurance policy enough to pay off the house, provide a college education for the kids and have some left over.  And if both spouses are working they each should have adequate insurance.

What bothers me most is the seeming dependence on the government to provide any shortfall.  IMO, people under 40 will be lucky to see any social security and they had best be prepared to provide for themselves.

[occasionalrain]

---

@Bri369 wrote:

---

@occasionalrain wrote:

I don't think it prudent to be worth more to someone dead than alive.

Another consideration, if you are the beneficiary and the insured in murdered, you become the prime suspect.

---

I care to think of it as not burdening them with debt.  

No one is worth more dead.  That's very sinister.

---

With more than half of marriages ending in divorce, many acrimonious, with fights over money and custody, murder is not that uncommon. Add in an insurance pay off and some will take the gamble.

[Venezia]

I think anyone with young children should have adequate life insurance.  With the loss of one partner, everything becomes much more difficult and there are expenses that won't be covered by one person's salary, in most cases.  I'm talking about the average person, not the uber-rich.

When it's only adults who can provide for themselves, I don't think life insurance is necessary.  But there's never a "one size fits all" in these situations.  So many things, unexpected health issues for example, that can crop up.

And many employers provide favorable terms for insurance coverage for their employees.  (My previous employer did.  For literally a few dollars a month I had $250,000 for both myself and my DH.)  I think it's silly not to take advantage of that.  You just never know!

[patbz]

When I retired at 63 I bought a term life insurance (until I'm 80) to ensure DH would be able to continue our lifestyle if I should precede him ( we earned equal incomes).  This was a better option than taking a survivor benefit out of my Federal job pension.  I'm now 77, and we are debt free so its nice that this $2000 annual payment goes away very soon.

[Mom2Dogs]

People that depend on the govenment (WHEN THEY CAN WORK) are a detriment to our society.

 Yes, they should have term insurance, it is not expensive....a lot of people live beyond their means and if one spouse dies the other is left with massive debt and the loss of an income.