Suze Orman – Term and Life Insurance Comparison

Suze Orman explains the difference between a Term and Life Insurance See more information at http://onpersonalfinance.com/insurance/why-you-should-be-insured…

zv7qrnb

25 thoughts on “Suze Orman – Term and Life Insurance Comparison

  1. TheBuildGroup says:

    You’re the ONLY one misleading! What estate taxes? Clarify your statement.
    At 69, if he dies with almost a million saved, I think they can just write
    a check. That’s just common sense. Quit giving people half truths!

  2. G Pag says:

    Hey Kstrauch are you in NY, If you are and your willing to put money where
    you mouth is, I will prove to you your math is misleading. split funding
    can never be beat and you should know that.

  3. Roque Agency Insurance says:

    Suze O. says it best!! Come check out the rates we offer from any one of
    our 22 different A-Rated carriers and Get More Than You’re Already Paying
    For!!

  4. SDA0271 says:

    The problem with Suze Orman is she lives in this fantasy world where the
    stock market does not EVER go down and you get a steady rate of return of
    8%. Come back to reality Suze! People lost 40% of their net worth back in
    the 2008/2009 crash! Meanwhile, people that had money in their whole life
    policy…the cash value was unaffected.

  5. TheMitrvp1 says:

    the numbers are the numbers. if they are paying $900 more for the same
    coverage amount, how does it make any sense to buy a whole life policy
    instead of investing. for you that cry about the stock market do the
    research and see what the 10, 20, 30 year average is compared to the trash
    value on a life insurance policy that you have to borrow you own money to
    use or surrender the policy.

  6. Stephen Joseph says:

    Before applying assess your situation. The application process is not just
    about your current health it is about your health, financial, and personal
    history – ALL OF IT.Be sure you are comfortable with giving insurance
    companies full access to that information. Also, the questions are totally
    invasive so any mis-communication can be used against you as a reason to
    deny coverage to your beneficiaries. My advice is live as healthy as
    possible, save your money, and don’t go into debt.

  7. TheMitrvp1 says:

    No This case was $900 difference that this family paid out every month on
    the exact $1 million coverage for the wife that was 4 yrs younger than the
    husband. \Anyone that would do this to a family is a crook.

  8. zucchini2007 says:

    There are several other problems with whole-life policies: they endow at
    age 100. Endowment is when the policy matures and the face value is paid
    out to the policyowner. But who lives to be 100 years old?? Also, whatever
    money you borrow against these policies you have to pay back with interest.
    If you’ve got a whole-life policy, CANCEL it! Then get a term one for a
    much smaller premium, and throw the rest of that money into a mutual fund.

  9. Brooks Loomis says:

    $900/mo *12 months (of today’s dollars) = $10,800 in Yr 1. If I assume an
    inflation rate of 2.5%, then over the course of 30 years that would equate
    to $474,149. That’s zero-risk, “stick your cash in your mattress” taxable
    dollars. If starting in Year 1 I were to invest those dollars and get an
    average expected rate of return of 4.5%, over 30 years that would be
    $889,785. Those may be conservative assumptions (4.5% ROR), but I didn’t
    factor in losses, and Year 30’s premium would not be invested

  10. Peter Wexler says:

    Choosing a whole life versus a term life insurance policy is more about
    personal preference. In one case, the customer builds a nest egg. In
    another, the insurance is meant only to help those left behind, in the
    event of one’s death. Both policies have value. For people older than 40,
    term life is probably better. For people younger than 30, whole life is
    better. Keep in mind that there is a point when whole life insurance is
    self sustaining.

  11. Peter Wexler says:

    Suze Orman is partially right, in this case, but only because you’re right
    (and wrong), no matter the recommendation Oran’s financial advice track
    record, however, has never been very good. She tells people to buy stocks,
    high, and sell low. (I remember the lead up to 2000). Also, she is very
    abrasive, in this video, and in others. I don’t think that I could sit in
    the same room as her for more than a couple of minutes.

  12. Pennsylvania Elder Estate Advocacy Services says:

    She has a few valid points, however when you still need insurance at the
    end of the 30 year term (or any term period) if it guaranteed renewable it
    will be at a much higher cost and it is like renting a house you never own
    it. I heavily suggest you do a combination of permanent and term insurance
    or look at an equity indexed annuity instead. Each type of insurance has
    its own benefits, but diversifying is better than dismissing.

  13. Justin Hardee says:

    That is an outright lie, zucchini. You have no idea what you are talking
    about. A whole life policy face is value will never be below what it is on
    day one. In most cases, with paid up additions, it will be considerably
    more than the original face. Don’t give out advice when you have no idea
    what you are talking about.

  14. zucchini2007 says:

    WL is still a rip off because I KNOW people can get just as much, if not
    more, coverage from a TERM policy than whole life for a lot less!

  15. natedog34 says:

    what? if the face value is $1M then that’s the death benefit the
    beneficiary gets upon the spouse’ death…only way its lower is if there
    were loans taken out of the policy and never paid back. Funny how Suzie
    never asks anyone if the permanent policy is over/max funded. That’s what
    makes it way better than “investing the difference” in mutual funds. Perm
    insurance is great if you fund it properly (most don’t anyway).

  16. Tresha Barrett says:

    And when the insured dies, the beneficiary will receive the death benefit
    ($1,700,000) but they WILL NOT receive the $900,000 cash value. I think
    that’s where the “rip off” is. If they invested that money (mutual fund or
    annuity), it would all be there for the beneficiary! Even if it’s not
    $900,000…however much it is would be 100% theirs. true or true?

  17. Ryan Langmuir says:

    Term life, once the term is over, payment increases as you age should you
    choose to extend it… just keep that in mind. For those who say that whole
    life is a ripoff, yes face value may be less but remember that it takes the
    guesswork out of investing. If something happens, then you get a guaranteed
    return.

  18. Esmeralda santana says:

    Yes susie is very right , that is a ripoff whole life is a rip off. Just
    invest the difference in a Roth IRA! And you’ll see how much money you have
    it’s amazing how much money you’ll have! Thanks to all this knowledge to
    Primerica I’m learning quite a lot!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>